Obsidian has already proven they could do wonders with the Fallout 4 dialogue system

Thankfully for me Fallout is not going to die out ever. It's actually become mainstream at this point. Conan O'Brian even made a Fallout video. I am staying optimistic that Fallout becoming mainstream and all this money going around the franchise may be good for it - Bethesda may let Obsidian do another game and may allow for experimentation and even a top-down isometric Fallout like the originals. Spin-offs could be amazing. Or they could be cheesy cell phone games. I'm hoping for the former.
Click to expand...

I don't see the whole top-down isometric spin-off thing happening, though. The cheesy cellphone game has already been made, so why would Bethesda invest in a serious old school isometric RPG spin-off that's never going to sell as much as the schlocky shooter series that they've been selling so well?

Also, I'm only saying the -franchise- has died. Fallout hasn't died. There's still endings to both F1 and F2 I haven't seen yet, so there's still plenty of replay value for me in those games, and I've played them a lot. And then there's the occasional indie old school RPG being released every now and then. I'll still get my fix of RPG. It just won't be Fallout. It'd be nice if at least the Van Buren project got finished before Interplay went under, though. But we're living in a capitalist world, so beggars can't be choosers.
 
dopezilla said:
Thankfully for me Fallout is not going to die out ever. It's actually become mainstream at this point. Conan O'Brian even made a Fallout video. I am staying optimistic that Fallout becoming mainstream and all this money going around the franchise may be good for it - Bethesda may let Obsidian do another game and may allow for experimentation and even a top-down isometric Fallout like the originals. Spin-offs could be amazing. Or they could be cheesy cell phone games. I'm hoping for the former.
Click to expand...

I don't see the whole top-down isometric spin-off thing happening, though. The cheesy cellphone game has already been made, so why would Bethesda invest in a serious old school isometric RPG spin-off that's never going to sell as much as the schlocky shooter series that they've been selling so well?

Also, I'm only saying the -franchise- has died. Fallout hasn't died. There's still endings to both F1 and F2 I haven't seen yet, so there's still plenty of replay value for me in those games, and I've played them a lot. And then there's the occasional indie old school RPG being released every now and then. I'll still get my fix of RPG. It just won't be Fallout. It'd be nice if at least the Van Buren project got finished before Interplay went under, though. But we're living in a capitalist world, so beggars can't be choosers.
Click to expand...

I'm sure you're probably aware but I have read that Van Buren might not be so dead after all in the sense that InXile filed papers regarding the rights to it or something like that.

And I can see a scenario where Bethesda might be sitting on its Benjamin Pile and decide "Hey why don't we have Brian Fargo do another Fallout game and have him do all this work and we rake in the cash while we do other things."
 
Irwin John Finster said:
dopezilla said:
Thankfully for me Fallout is not going to die out ever. It's actually become mainstream at this point. Conan O'Brian even made a Fallout video. I am staying optimistic that Fallout becoming mainstream and all this money going around the franchise may be good for it - Bethesda may let Obsidian do another game and may allow for experimentation and even a top-down isometric Fallout like the originals. Spin-offs could be amazing. Or they could be cheesy cell phone games. I'm hoping for the former.
Click to expand...

I don't see the whole top-down isometric spin-off thing happening, though. The cheesy cellphone game has already been made, so why would Bethesda invest in a serious old school isometric RPG spin-off that's never going to sell as much as the schlocky shooter series that they've been selling so well?

Also, I'm only saying the -franchise- has died. Fallout hasn't died. There's still endings to both F1 and F2 I haven't seen yet, so there's still plenty of replay value for me in those games, and I've played them a lot. And then there's the occasional indie old school RPG being released every now and then. I'll still get my fix of RPG. It just won't be Fallout. It'd be nice if at least the Van Buren project got finished before Interplay went under, though. But we're living in a capitalist world, so beggars can't be choosers.
Click to expand...

I'm sure you're probably aware but I have read that Van Buren might not be so dead after all in the sense that InXile filed papers regarding the rights to it or something like that.

And I can see a scenario where Bethesda might be sitting on its Benjamin Pile and decide "Hey why don't we have Brian Fargo do another Fallout game and have him do all this work and we rake in the cash while we do other things."
Click to expand...

I damn hope so.
 
dopezilla said:
Irwin John Finster said:
I see no downside whatsoever to having Obsidian make another Fallout game for anyone including Bethesda. Only positives.
Click to expand...

Would Obisidian be allowed to implement a skill system? It kinda sucks now that the last remaining RPG elements are stripped from the franchise. You can't even mod this shit back into shape now, so Obisidian will have a tough job cut out for them. At least they could produce a -decent- story, but still, the whole franchise is becoming less and less like anything Fallout ever was. If Bethsoft keeps dumbing it down, Obisidian has to dumb down along with it. :(

Also, even though FNV was more like Fallout than F3 and F4 ever will be, it still didn't feel like a proper sequel to the original series. Not just because they had to work with the whole "fallout is a shooter now"-thing but also story wise. Can't quite put my finger on it. In F1 and F2 I felt like I was out to save what was left of the world. FNV was just a silly war for territory. No real villains or heroes there. It felt weak after the great narratives of F1 and F2. At least they managed to be respectful towards the original series, but that just makes it a nice tribute.

I don't think the Fallout franchise can be saved in any way, at this point. :(

Edit: after some sips of beer and some thought I've come to the conclusion that it'd be best if the whole franchise just died out after this. Even if Obsidian is allowed to produce a marginally better game than Bethesda did, it'll still just be beating a dead horse. This shit has gone beyond redemption by now. As long as the rights to the franchise are in the hands of Bethsoft and they get to decide how the actual mechanics of the game work with their engine and all, it'll never be like Fallout ever again.
Click to expand...

I think you're being way too hard on New Vegas. The original Fallout was not about saving what's left of the world. That game was about saving the assholes in Vault 13 who then exile you for it. There not being any real heroes and villains was deliberately intentional. Fallout New Vegas made the best of a bad situation and is proof that some fans will never be happy even when concessions are made for them.
 
Hassknecht said:
Internet search engines, mate. Not that hard to use :razz:
Click to expand...
Yeah, sorry about that. Lazy asshole overhere.>_>

joevonzombie said:
I think you're being way too hard on New Vegas. The original Fallout was not about saving what's left of the world. That game was about saving the assholes in Vault 13 who then exile you for it. There not being any real heroes and villains was deliberately intentional. Fallout New Vegas made the best of a bad situation and is proof that some fans will never be happy even when concessions are made for them.
Click to expand...

Maybe I am. I've never liked shooters or shooty elements in games and it took a whole lot of fun out of the game for me, personally. Also some of the factions felt pretty silly to me (Ceasar's Legion in front). Don't get me wrong, though, I played the game all the way through, and I did enjoy myself at some points. At others it just felt like the schlocky grindfest Fallout 3 offered. Oh well, maybe I'll give it another run and take a look at the story again. Maybe if I change factions a bit I'll find the whole thing a bit more captivating. Also, I have to say, the plot didn't leave me raging at the writers like the plot in F3 did, so that's nice, I guess.

About F1 though, defeating or joining the Master definitely felt like there was more at stake than just the lives of the people in Vault 13. As soon as you deliver that water chip and the Overseer sends you out again, I didn't feel like staying anyway. As the game progresses, the Vault becomes less and less important to the narrative. The whole save the vault thing was just a nudge to get you out in the world, I feel.
 
Last edited:
dopezilla said:
Hassknecht said:
Internet search engines, mate. Not that hard to use :razz:
Click to expand...
Yeah, sorry about that. Lazy asshole overhere.>_>

joevonzombie said:
I think you're being way too hard on New Vegas. The original Fallout was not about saving what's left of the world. That game was about saving the assholes in Vault 13 who then exile you for it. There not being any real heroes and villains was deliberately intentional. Fallout New Vegas made the best of a bad situation and is proof that some fans will never be happy even when concessions are made for them.
Click to expand...

Maybe I am. I've never liked shooters or shooty elements in games and it took a whole lot of fun out of the game for me, personally. Also some of the factions felt pretty silly to me (Ceasar's Legion in front). Don't get me wrong, though, I played the game all the way through, and I did enjoy myself at some points. At others it just felt like the schlocky grindfest Fallout 3 offered. Oh well, maybe I'll give it another run and take a look at the story again. Maybe if I change factions a bit I'll find the whole thing a bit more captivating. Also, I have to say, the plot didn't leave me raging at the writers like the plot in F3 did, so that's nice, I guess.

About F1 though, defeating or joining the Master definitely felt like there was more at stake than just the lives of the people in Vault 13. As soon as you deliver that water chip and the Overseer sends you out again, I didn't feel like staying anyway. As the game progresses, the Vault becomes less and less important to the narrative. The whole save the vault thing was just a nudge to get you out in the world, I feel.
Click to expand...

Caesar's Legion was a fantastic addition and something they've wanted to do since Fallout 2. Fallout 2's talking Deathclaws and The Shi are far sillier. On your next playthrough actually talk to Caesar, he may change your mind about the Legion.

The mutant ending in Fallout 1 is solely focused on Vault 13.
 
I'll give Caesar's Legion a chance on my next playthrough. And I totally forgot about the talking Deathclaws in F2. Been a while. Oh well. I'm currently playing Fallout Fixt and when I finish that I'll go on to the Fallout restoration project, and then I'll just skip three and give NV another shot. If I don't get distracted by other games, that is.

If and when Obsidian ever releases a F4 spin-off, I'll probably play it anyway. At least give it a shot. Although I'm currently more stoked about hearing about InXile having purchased the rights for Van Buren. I'm pretty sure much of my dislike for the direction Fallout has taken has a lot to do with the whole new medium Bethesda chose for the franchise. Come to think of it, F3 and New Vegas were the only shooter type games I've ever seriously played apart from some Time Splitters Future Perfect (which I didn't even finish). All games I have ever played have been top down isometric RPG's and the occasional RTS.
 
I second Caesar's Legion - great writing and characters. All the factions in New Vegas, even the small ones, fit so well and did so much for the universe.
 
Well, I don't think it's just the dialogue system that would be a problem for Obsidian, but let's start with that.

The limited number of options and the short description of what you're trying to say aren't the only problem. There's also the fact that in FO4, the only 'check' associated with speech is a straight charisma one, whereas we used to have lines based on success on various stats or skills (science, speech etc). I also wouldn't be suprised if the engine had no actual possibility to link a character to how they react to specific things: i.e., this guy will be charmed easily, but will react badly to physical intimidation. This guy will take bribes, but flattery won't work. From what I can tell of FO4 so far, those mechanisms just aren't there, and I'm not convinced they could be 'easily' built on top of what is.

All that being said, they could probably do a better job with the existing system, yes. But I fear it would still be very unsufficient to emulate the complex dialogs we remember fondly.

Then there's all the rest, which isn't really the topic here - but I'd be curious to know if a game built with FO4 as a basis could accomodate for a faction system as 'complex' as the one in NV, or if those games will now just have to live with ElderScrolls-like faction mechanisms, i.e. you can join EVERYTHING and climb at the top of it all. The same way in Skyrim you can easily become the leader of every faction - there's no mechanism that says "Hey, err, we know you're the archmage of the mages guild, and we don't want such a public figure to join our assassins brotherhood thankyouverymuch".

If the underlying game mechanisms (well, the actual source code is what I mean) won't allow that kind of stuff, I'm not convinced how much freedom Obsidian would have.

But I don't know how it all works technically underneath - it could be that Obsidian would have sufficient leeway to rewrite all this to suit their needs, who knows (actually, yeah, does anyone here know how the NV development worked from an implementation perspective?)
 
Irwin John Finster said:
The Courier said:
Alpha Protocol is actually one of my favorite games, warts and all. And it has more than most. Though, frankly, I just want to see Obsidian play with the toys in FO4's box. New Vegas with decent shooting and a *slightly* more competent framework would be wonderful. I want it more than anything but I will not be holding my breath.
Click to expand...
Bethesda would have to be out of their mind to make the business decision not to ask Obsidian to make another Fallout game.

I don't know why people are so pessimistic regarding this possibility. Fallout: New Vegas was a great success and sold a LOT. You would be absolutely insane as a business not to do that again because it's a lot of money we are talking about. And allowing it to happen would get good press from Fallout fans who are miffed at the shift away from an RPG and away from the original Fallouts.

I see no downside whatsoever to having Obsidian make another Fallout game for anyone including Bethesda. Only positives.
Click to expand...

Well, there is the possibility that Bethesda with their childlike manners don't want fans and reviewers to realize Obsidian handles the IP better than they are.

I still have this nagging suspicion that they wanted Obsidian to fail hard with New Vegas, so that they could say "yeah, well look what some of the original developers managed to do with the IP". Same way they totally fucked Interplay over with Fallout Online (which I'm glad we never got to see).
 
While I loved Alpha Protocol, I really don't want Fallout to have such a dialogue system. It simply doesn't suit the game, even if Obsidian can write 100 times better dialogue than Bethesda.
 
Lexx said:
While I loved Alpha Protocol, I really don't want Fallout to have such a dialogue system. It simply doesn't suit the game, even if Obsidian can write 100 times better dialogue than Bethesda.
Click to expand...
I agree. The whole Mass Effect thing only felt in place with that game. When they put the dialogue wheel into Dragon Age II, replacing the better previous system (which was similar to Fallout with written text and no voiced protagonist) it changed the game for the worse and no longer felt unique.

It is also severely limiting as comparisons of Fallout 3, New Vegas, and Fallout 4 show.
 
Lexx said:
While I loved Alpha Protocol, I really don't want Fallout to have such a dialogue system. It simply doesn't suit the game, even if Obsidian can write 100 times better dialogue than Bethesda.
Click to expand...

My point is, though, that if they were forced to use it in whatever spin-off game Bethesda would theoretically let them work on, they would do a much better job with it than Bethesda ever could.
 
Irwin John Finster said:
Lexx said:
While I loved Alpha Protocol, I really don't want Fallout to have such a dialogue system. It simply doesn't suit the game, even if Obsidian can write 100 times better dialogue than Bethesda.
Click to expand...
I agree. The whole Mass Effect thing only felt in place with that game. When they put the dialogue wheel into Dragon Age II, replacing the better previous system (which was similar to Fallout with written text and no voiced protagonist) it changed the game for the worse and no longer felt unique.

It is also severely limiting as comparisons of Fallout 3, New Vegas, and Fallout 4 show.
Click to expand...

And Im pretty sure the big reason ME suits the wheel and DA doesn't- is because in ME you are playing as an already existing character, who already has a basic personality in place (you are just tweaking that personality, or choosing how she becomes over time). Whereas in DA you are meant to be 'you'/blank slate. It makes sense to have a wheel for Shepherd, with basic reactions available (sarcastic, rude, helpful), and makes no sense for a blank slate character.
 
I dunno about Obsidian making a new Fallout. Obviously I want it, but the idea of them having to work for the idiotic creeps at Bethesda again just makes me angry.
 
Earth said:
I dunno about Obsidian making a new Fallout. Obviously I want it, but the idea of them having to work for the idiotic creeps at Bethesda again just makes me angry.
Click to expand...
Didn't you read that Youtube Comment I posted? If you don't like Bethesda's hard work, it is exactly the same as "shitting on a soldier's grave on Veterans' Day."
 
Irwin John Finster said:
Earth said:
I dunno about Obsidian making a new Fallout. Obviously I want it, but the idea of them having to work for the idiotic creeps at Bethesda again just makes me angry.
Click to expand...
Didn't you read that Youtube Comment I posted? If you don't like Bethesda's hard work, it is exactly the same as "shitting on a soldier's grave on Veterans' Day."
Click to expand...
Nah, if you want to use tortured analogies it's more like your ex wife's new husband letting you see your child after he made the kid dress up like a clown and make fool of himself in front of the whole world.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top