Would you pay money for a new release of F1/F2?

[Morgan_]

If they are going to re-release an old game I'd rather they have some deviations or a complete reimagining than just the same thing. Just go play the og at that point.
The new FF7 remake wasn't what the old one was, but I'd rather have it than the same thing with minimal difference.
I would like to see an overhaul of the game like what is shown in this thread if anything:

https://www.nma-fallout.com/threads/red888guns.219281/

Anything less than this would be pointless other than as a cash grab imo.

I kind of fail to see the business relevance in a team that has not done anything similar handling a remake of a game they had nothing to do with. It'd be far more viable to outsource it to someone else. Also, Bethesda is now owned by Microsoft, as is Obsidian.

And then add to the fact that they are juggling 76, Starfield and TES6 at the same time currently. There is also the existence of NV and then Fallout Shelter being developed by a Canadian studio.

 

[Norzan]

Why would Bethesda care about being the sole creators of Fallout?

You mean that franchise they fought tooth and nail to get it, to the point of suing companies to get the full rights? Bethesda has had an hard-on for the Fallout series for ages, and jumped on the first opportunity to get it when they heard it was available.

As far as I know Bethesda has been bought by Microsoft. This isn’t some kind of “partnership”, Microsoft owns Bethesda and all its properties and there’s not a damn thing Beth can do about it.

Unless we know the actual contract, it's anyone's guess how much control they have. I wouldn't be surprised if there were some stipulations giving them full control over specific IPs. Bethesda didn't really need to sell itself because they haven't struggled financially since after Morrowind's release. They selling themselves to Microsoft for that money was just them stunting on people to flex how much worth their company has even after the fuckup of Fallout 76. I also find it hard to believe that they would lose all control over their most sucessful IPs. Pretty sure they would have said no to even 7,5 billions if it meant losing all control over the Elder Scrolls and Fallout series.

And, what, are people gonna start believing as well that Microsoft is gonna allow anyone else but Bethesda to make Elder Scrolls games? Please. We have many big companies that bought smaller companies delegating specific franchises to each of those smaller companies. Like Nintendo only allowing Gamefreak to make mainline Pokemon games. Same exact thing with Microsoft only allowing 343 studios to make Halo games. Brand recognition matters to big companies.

So i have a very hard time believing that anyone else but Bethesda would handle a Fallout 1 remake. Mobile spinoffs like Fallout Shelter and online spinoffs like ESO don't count since people usually don't expect the team making the mainline games to work on mobile and online spinoffs (Because they are, well, working on the mainline titles.). And New Vegas is an exception to the rule, and really the only reason Bethesda allowed Obsidian to work on it would be most likely because of the fact that several members of Obsidian worked on Fallout 2. I doubt they would have given it to some random team that had never worked on a Fallout game.

 

[Morgan_]

I feel like we're overthinking this. Bethesda would be the sole devs of the update/re-release if there were almost nothing done to the game other than stabilizations added in. Anything more than that I would think there would have to be a secondary developer involved like they have already done previously. Possibly MS Studios themselves given the situation? I really don't see this as a stretch considering they can still slap their branding on it no matter what.

Either way, if there isn't a Red888guns style update I wouldn't pay for it as I already own them. A big overhaul like that would be exciting. Maybe add nice tweaks and features to the engine or use a more modern one too. Fuck it, why not.

 

[The Dutch Ghost]

I think it is save to say that as long as Bethesda is around that we will never get the remake of Fallout 1 (and 2) that we would like to see.

No upscale of the graphics but maintaining the same style.
No tweaking of the gameplay here and there but maintaining the original game mechanics.
No possibility of the game (s) perhaps being remade in 3D but remaining isometric and the graphics and gameplay completely based on the original games.

It's going to be the originals with possible modifications or nothing.

You mean that franchise they fought tooth and nail to get it, to the point of suing companies to get the full rights? Bethesda has had an hard-on for the Fallout series for ages, and jumped on the first opportunity to get it when they heard it was available.

And yet they had barely any idea what the games were about other than some themes they liked that they picked from it, and kept milking over and over.

 

[SquidWard]

I would like to see an overhaul of the game like what is shown in this thread if anything:

As cool as it is to see Fallout 1 in first person, the game would drastically change or be awkward. The locations are too far apart. So either you make shit squeezed together and have to create content between locations to give the player something to do a la Fallout 3, NV, 4, or you have to just make it auto fast travel them to the next one with no random encounters or have the random encounters happen in a randomly generated terrain? It'd be weird no matter the method.

Just update the sprites of Fallout 1, make the UI far less clunky, make inventory far more manageable, clean out the bugs officially. They'd probably remove the time limits too but that was never very popular. There's enough first person action shooter RPGs, don't make Fallout 1 one of those in an official capacity. I don't mind if fans do something like that at all.

And yet they had barely any idea what the games were about other than some themes they liked that they picked from it, and kept milking over and over.

I'm starting to think they understood at least some of Fallout and were really scared to do anything quite new with it and since they were scared with Fallout 3 it hindered what 4 could be as well. They saw all the iconic things and said, "Well, we also must include this. The old fans will surely be pissed if we make this without Super Mutants and Deathclaws." So they shoehorned them in, and since they did that, it became something both sides of the fandom expect in a game (in some ways, obviously we'd rather NOT have it where it doesn't make sense but you get my point I'd hope).

I really feel like they were terrified to do something new with Fallout. Look at all the things 3 takes from 1 and 2. The story is essentially the plots of 1 and 2 mashed together but different. You have to fix a water problem (this time for the whole wasteland not just your Vault), the Enclave are doing Enclave shit, you talk to the current president of the Enclave in that as well. They were worried that older fans wouldn't like it without these things I'm guessing and ultimately, that was a bigger thorn than the gameplay differences.

 

[The Dutch Ghost]

I'm starting to think they understood at least some of Fallout and were really scared to do anything quite new with it and since they were scared with Fallout 3 it hindered what 4 could be as well. They saw all the iconic things and said, "Well, we also must include this. The old fans will surely be pissed if we make this without Super Mutants and Deathclaws." So they shoehorned them in, and since they did that, it became something both sides of the fandom expect in a game (in some ways, obviously we'd rather NOT have it where it doesn't make sense but you get my point I'd hope).

I really feel like they were terrified to do something new with Fallout. Look at all the things 3 takes from 1 and 2. The story is essentially the plots of 1 and 2 mashed together but different. You have to fix a water problem (this time for the whole wasteland not just your Vault), the Enclave are doing Enclave shit, you talk to the current president of the Enclave in that as well. They were worried that older fans wouldn't like it without these things I'm guessing and ultimately, that was a bigger thorn than the gameplay differences.

Yes, I also suspect the same. That Bethesda thinks that Fallout depends on the repeat of iconic elements, not daring to stray away from those.
And in the process turning these into their own stereotypes

-Vaults are always about experiments
-FEV was widespread before the war, explaining why there are loads of Super Mutants. And it always has to play a key role in the storyline.
-The Enclave has bases all over the US and a population in the millions.
-Vault Tec, Poseidon Energy, and West Tek were everywhere.

But I do think too that Bethesda's writers simply do not have the interest or perhaps capabilities of telling a story or a campaign on the level of Fallout when it does try to be a bit more intellectual.

To them people just want to go in to the world, join the BOS, fight the evil Super Mutants and Enclave soldiers, and perform the duty of the 'chosen one'.
Everything else is a distraction or filler.

They should have made their own IP.

 

[SquidWard]

Should have but they sure garnered attention from people with Fallout. Worked out well for them arguably. 76 did poorly on initial sales but it was already mostly in the works and has revenue from in game transactions. And despite all the ill will it garnered, Bethesda fans are still going to buy the next Elder Scrolls, the next Fallout, and Starfield.

Someone told me that 76 would be the ultimate gaming experience. You could play with friends (which made it better than any other Fallout) and you could still find lore and stories in holotapes to listen while you build your camp and your friends are offline.

Funnily, they do not play 76 anymore. But this person was very adamant that the Bethesda Fallouts were miles above New Vegas. They really just liked the goofy aspect of listening to boppin' 50s music and killing random stuff and looting random stuff in an open world. That's what they really valued for some reason.

 

[The Dutch Ghost]

So the Fallout universe/franchise is absolutely wasted on these people.

 

[Morgan_]

I feel like some of you have been coming to the same conclusion since 2008.

As cool as it is to see Fallout 1 in first person, the game would drastically change or be awkward. The locations are too far apart. So either you make shit squeezed together and have to create content between locations to give the player something to do a la Fallout 3, NV, 4, or you have to just make it auto fast travel them to the next one with no random encounters or have the random encounters happen in a randomly generated terrain? It'd be weird no matter the method.

Just update the sprites of Fallout 1, make the UI far less clunky, make inventory far more manageable, clean out the bugs officially. They'd probably remove the time limits too but that was never very popular. There's enough first person action shooter RPGs, don't make Fallout 1 one of those in an official capacity. I don't mind if fans do something like that at all.
.

True, I agree with the UI update. Most of Red888guns stuff is isometric. Maybe first person view could be used in context situations, but I wouldn't really want fps Fallout 1 either. Unity would be the best bet for an overhaul. Would get modding community excited for all the new modern tools and it could run on basically anything.

 

[Hardboiled Android]

-Vault Tec, Poseidon Energy, and West Tek were everywhere.

Well Poseidon and Vault-Tec actually makes sense being everywhere. If anything I think Bethesda has created far too many small and midsized businesses that should just be owned by a handful of monopolies

 

[PaxVenire]

I would like a Fallout 1 and 2 "remake" if it was like the artwork of that one Red888Guns fella over on DeviantArt and it got a nice polished look to it. Keeping the trimetric look and the aesthetics of the original game meaning no ugly ass dollhouse Jetsons architecture, and instead making the overworld have new and varied landscapes so you're not passing the same mountain setpiece every other random encounter. Would be cool to see newer models on the creatures and NPCs like Tycho in his Desert Ranger uniform or Mr. Handy and Robobrains looking like they do now for example. Perhaps combat could even be tweaked and they could adapt some of the cool combat mechanics from Tactics like taking cover.

However, if we're talking about a Bethesda-made "remake" of Fallout 1 and 2 in first person -- nah.

 

[The Dutch Ghost]

Well Poseidon and Vault-Tec actually makes sense being everywhere. If anything I think Bethesda has created far too many small and midsized businesses that should just be owned by a handful of monopolies

I felt that Black Isle had planned some good new additional companies such as Greenway Hydroponics, Bal Aerospace (probably based on Bael), and in Fallout New Vegas we had such as new companies like REPCONN.

Bethesda has perhaps added too many throwaway companies.

 

[Morgan_]

Anyone remember Cuppa Joe? I remember Cuppa Joe....

 

[Hardboiled Android]

I felt that Black Isle had planned some good new additional companies such as Greenway Hydroponics, Bal Aerospace (probably based on Bael), and in Fallout New Vegas we had such as new companies like REPCONN.

Bethesda has perhaps added too many throwaway companies.

Oh yeah, I definitely think the setting needs more megacorps, I was referring to throwaway companies. Bethesda games are full of small one office companies who have insane government contracts to do whacky shit. Those sorts of mid-sized companies should be ones that are struggling against nationalization or monopolistic megacorps, as we saw with REPCONN in NV.

Though just as a matter of fact, Ball is a real aerospace firm in Boulder. It was just mentioned for background fluff like IBM in the design doc.

 

[Millim]

It depends for me.
I think a joint effort with folks from Obsidian, Inixlle and Bethesda would be the way forward. You have Obsidian making any rewrites with Tim Cain on board, Inixille dealing with development and Bethesda consulting and making sure things run smoothly.

The issue is, and most have stated this as well, that Bethesda would probably want their new art style which doesn’t fit the direction or mood for Fallout 1&2 (especially 1).

Ideally, a UI update along with some clearing of models and some fixes from Fallout fixt (especially it’s canon ending) would be ideal.

I would say some rewrites just to make them fit better with later continuity (Las Vegas was mentioned in F1 which could be turned into New Vegas now) but I feel this would also break the game as Bethesda’s continuity breaks the Universe.

In f1, the option to turn the timer on or off (I don’t know why this wasn’t an option anyway, just let the players have their choice on that front) and also add some stuff for F1.

I’m gonna say something that would get me nuked, but maybe cut some of the goofier stuff from F2 and clean up the content a bit. I love that game, but it’s the one I’ve gone back to the least just because I think it’s a bit of a mess at times.

Also a big one, but let us control our companions in Combat, this may seem like I’m missing the point, but action in F1&2 is so damn slow and there are many occurrences where my Character would have been okay if only Ian didn’t spend AC points to run to a different enemy and attack them instead of the guy who has 1hp next to me.


Regardless, we’ll always have the original anyway, so even if a remake is shit, we still got the good version untouched.

 

[Slaughter Manslaught]

The source code of the original games is lost, which restrains A LOT what they can do.

 

[Gizmojunk]

The source code of the original games is lost, which restrains A LOT what they can do.

FOnline would seem to be a good starting point, or at least proof that a commercial team could manage to re-implement the engine.

Troika had their own engine for this, and even though Activision possibly owns it, they could certainly recreate it if necessary.




I would pay for a re-release done by the original team, and done free of commercial/moral, and ethical pressure; done under the stated intention to remaster and improve upon the original foundation of the game.

IE. Tweaking the original, not retro-fitting it.

Also they did investigate the use of 3D polygons rather than sprites, but they could not get the desired framerate on then-current popular hardware; they certaily could do that now.

As cool as it is to see Fallout 1 in first person, the game would drastically change or be awkward.

True.

The locations are too far apart.

I don't see it that way. Hopefully they would just do what has been suggested for over 15 years; procedural wastelands between major locations. Have the overland map—same as Fallout 1, have the terrain match it; use it for random encounters, and otherwise play out the way Fallout did.

 

[Slaughter Manslaught]

FOnline would seem to be a good starting point, or at least proof that a commercial team could manage to re-implement the engine.

Yeah, I think that would be the way to go: Create an engine mimmicking the original Fallout engine.
In fact, aside from the FOnline engine, I'm surprised we didn't have another attempt at this.

It would be even better if it was a easily-moddable, open source engine. An OpenFallout, if you will.

I don't see it that way. Hopefully they would just do what has been suggested for over 15 years; procedural wastelands between major locations. Have the overland map—same as Fallout 1, have the terrain match it; use it for random encounters, and otherwise play out the way Fallout did.

Yeah, I think that would work as well. Every location is a large area for the player to roam around in first person perspective. Kinda like what the DLCs do.

 

[Norzan]

The source code of the original games is lost, which restrains A LOT what they can do.

Really? Here's another reason why i don't want a remaster/remake/whatever of Fallout 1. Last thing i want is Bethesda or current Obsidian attempting to recreate it.

And to me the "the original is always there, so it doesn't matter if the remaster is bad" is absolute bullshit. Why waste resources to make a worse version? Why waste my time with a promise of a better version, only for the new version to be worse? If you are not gonna bother with something that is actually better, then don't bother at all.

 

[Jogre]

To be honest, if I find myself liking old games, it's because they did something cool and unique within their limitations, and so called "upgrades" can sometimes be a downgrades.

Take Secret of Monkey Island: they didn't use pixel art for artistic reasons, they used it because that was what fairly common and cheap at the time. Decades later the special addition just loses the charm of the original.

Fallout 1 and 2 had a lot of limitations and worked within those limitations, and that's part of what makes it what it is. If the art changed, or the perspective it'd probably be worse.

Hell even if they just cleaned up a bit of obnoxious shit, I would still say that the game's identity has fundementally changed. I would rather people experience Fallout 1 and 2 as the games I fell in love with, rather than as newer versions made explicitly for them.