Well, if the popularity of Pillars of Eternity means anything, then I imagine that making Fallout a 2d/isometric game would be perfectly fine. Of course, there is no going back now, and that's perfectly fine as far as I'm concerned. However, there are a lot of different aspects of the original Fallouts that is severely lacking in Fallout 3 that would be great improvements to the gameplay. I'm a little more optimistic that the developers are probably looking to the originals even now to improve the game in Fallout 4, and I'm eager to see what they can come up with.

There is no technical reason for 2D anymore; the look (if wanted) is easier to achieve in 3D, like Pillars/Torment, and WL2 have. The original Fallout would have used 3D polygons, but they could not get the performance on the current consumer hardware of the day.

*Note: Pillar's of Eternity is a 3D game.

I've said that several times; perhaps even this year.

Fallout was begun as a turn based combat engine to simulate GURPS on the PC. This was before the concept for the lore IIRC; Originally they had even the idea of a time traveling boyfriend who killed the first homonid while trying to rescue his girlfriend from dinosaurs. (Not like that would have been approved all the way to release. ) They were GURPS players; they got the GURPS license; they spent about three years on a turn based http://i271.photobucket.com/albums/jj125/Gizmojunk/Fallout_GURPS_zpspmpkf1qt.jpg, that would ultimately lose the license and need to be changed in two weeks or get canceled.

**Further down that tangent is discussing Fallout for Fallout sake, instead of FO4 speculation. Suffice to say that it was their game even with the license change, and was the best GURPS implementation for PC and Mac. All evidence of the developer's related works (and statements) before business arrangements with Zenimax, show them sticking to format with Fallout speculation and potential related projects. My SIG quotes Feargus Urquart's own assurance about any future Fallout sequel they would plan.

Now these are practical people who do not hold the reigns to it anymore; but I would bet that had they obtained the rights the rights, we'd have a Fallout 3 from them that fit the ideal to a T.

Would I prefer FO4 as TB (speculating)... If it was well designed, of course; that's how it's supposed to be. Would I want the same TB gameplay for Witcher or TES, of course not. Different series, different styles, different agendas for each. That's the problem with FO3/NV/FO4, it follows the TES agenda instead of the Fallout agenda. Wanting tactical PC reliant TB combat in FO4 is not asking for a Fallout 2 clone, it's [wishing] for a modern DX11/12 title that fully exploits the modern desktop for a tactical TPP Iso3D cRPG in the style of the series namesake; and the game mechanics to support such a system. Why on Earth would a fan of the series expect or want an FPS of it? They could have done an FPS/RPG of it in 1997, they didn't, that was not the concept for the game.
PNP simulation was; or just enough of it ~for GURPS players.

**Obviously, no one is suggesting that future Fallouts be GURPS games, but one would hope that they always keep the same priorities as intended by the series architects.
(In the same way that Strawberry Jam should always taste like Strawberries.)

I'm sure they look at a lot of games when developing their new one, trying to get ideas. Skyrim rode on the kind of dragon obsession that has been in fantasy recently, and it just helped the games success.

I have a feeling that with their big bags of cash from Skyrim they are feeling confident that they got the financial baking to do whatever they want. I have no doubt that they are picking over the rest of the Fallout games to see what they can do, in the very least that I can be sure that is just one of the sets of games they are looking at. I don't have the exact article on hand, but I heard a few months after Skyrims release that Todd and Co were given free reign by the marketing/adminstrative side of Bethesda to basically do whatever they please, since they are convinced the games will sell like hotcakes regardless.

Personally? Im hoping for a greater scale to the game world. Fallout 3 covered such a small portion of the actual USA. Imagine if we have a game set in Boston, but its not just Boston and its surrounding areas, its a great portion of New England, with multiple states with diverse areas being covered?

A open world game like this where I can hold down W for two hours while navigating in one direction and not hit the edge of the world is something that I have not seen yet. And if it ever happens, I would be truly amazed, and I am sure that many other people would be too. Thats one thing I liked about the original Fallouts, that the action took place across what was actually a very large area in lore terms. I would also love to have a actual party follow me around, a group of companions with a whole bunch of depth to them. But then, there's a reason that I don't take much more than a canine companion in these games, the pathfinding even for Dogmeat or Meeko just gets stuck on terrain so easily. Ive tried it before with Fallout 3 mods, having my own mercenary squad, and it was just a chore to look after them all.

I'd personally like to see more detail. Technically Skyrim is much larger than Morrowind but, for the most part, everything seems a little bigger in Morrowind and there is more stuff to discover, more detail. I'd like to see the same attention to detail in Fallout 4. I'd also like to see a much more effective combat system. Most importantly, I'd like to see much better RPG elements concerning character development of the player and NPCs as well as options to complete the game in a number of different configurations, whether winning the game through combat, or dialog, or stealth, ect.

For the most part, the Elder Scrolls series has always been lacking in the choice and consequences department, from Arena to Skyrim, this area has always received the least amount of attention, or so it seems. I imagine that this is one of the reasons why a lot of Fallout fans, including myself, seem to be a bit disappointed to some extent in Fallout 3, simply because this area of the game didn't receive a whole lot of attention. It was a hallmark of the series, up until Fallout 3. The Elder Scrolls has always suffered from a lack of this and Fallout 3 is no better. I'm hoping they can do better. They need to do better to compete with new RPGs of today. Simply being an open world sandbox isn't enough.

Now why exactly should a series remain the same forever? Should TES have never had hand-crafted dungeons, even if it was what the people wanted? Should Resident Evil still have fixed and static camera angles, even if it wasnt what the fans wanted? Why should Fallout be rolled back to how it was before, when its not what the fans want, and there are many other modern games that already have the same gameplay?

Ahh, Morrowind. Morrowind was a bit insidious in that once you install a distant land mod, it feels a lot smaller. Morrowind is still something special though, and I wish modern day Bethesda would take a lot of inspiration from it.

You're right about the RPG mechanics though. I think developing Fallout 3 improved that area of TES actually, theres quite a bit of C&C in Skyrim where there wasnt before. It's not as much as a more traditional RPG, you're right, and I hope that like all things Bethesda improves on what they already have while still exploring new areas. Bethesda is one of the few companies that attempt to make a game that can please so many different people - and actually pull it off. I hope that they expand what their game is about and add in more elements to further the depth of what is already a combination of a wide variety of different game mechanics.

This would definitely require a node system map then.. I had enough trouble with Fallout 3 and New Vegas because of the awful scaling and the feeling it produced. If the game covers an area 5-10 times the size with a map twice the size I would absolutely flip. I've already described my issue beforehand when regarding a different matter: It takes me 15-20 minutes driving anywhere from fast to faster on a highway (following traffic) to get to my college in the tiny state of Connecticut. In the Fallout game where the PC is most definitely not jogging EVERYWHERE with 300lbs of equipment, my character is probably moving only a 2-3 mph and getting places rather quickly (Vault 22 and McCarran were supposedly a couple miles apart).

I think the awful way it's scaled right now is detrimental to the experience and does an awful job of depicting the wasteland. Now if we they implemented a node system which properly portrays a wasteland, as in skipping the boring and unnecessary wastes, only showing the important content, then I would be overjoyed with a large scale of New England. It would require multiple enormous nodes the size of New Vegas (high end) or Point Lookout (low end) to adequately portray the multiple states though. One map that is the size of, or even twice the size of Skryim, would not cut the cake.

Sorry, but myself and many others find it to the contrary: As in, there are far less C&C and meaningful material in Skyrim than their other games, and especially a lot of RPGs out there. Hell.. Metro 2033 (which can hardly be called an RPG at all) had more meaningful C&C than Skyrim did.

Hopefully the entire game does not take place within the walls of a super advanced city. A contrast between the city and surroundings (similar to Vault City but on a larger scale) could be nice. The surroundings could be mostly wasteland and could make up 3/4 of the game.

The question is: How long has the region been inhabited? How long has the Commonwealth and slave labor existed?

The region can not logically remain stagnant like Fallout 3's. With their technology they should have made a fairly large impact on the region. I'm talking NCR level reaching and Vault City (or better) contrast with Wastes. Based on the little they have teased of the region, they should have far greater 1.) Technology 2.) Knowledge 3.) Resources 4.) Labor 5.) Security than your average location and it should reflect it.

On that note, I would love a change in the wastes. Nature should be reclaiming the world! TLoU type cities and wasteland rather than a bunch of dirt and sand.

I was thinking that maybe the people of the Commonwealth don't want to share their tech., so you get a bunch of people living around the city and surroundings trying to scraqe out an existance.

But yea, it depends on how they write the backstory and whatnot.

Although I think it would play too much off of the BoS of the West.. It's definitely plausible. The inhabitants of Vault City made it pretty much impossible to become a citizen (was it even possible to pass the citizenship test?). I can see them lording their technology over those in the region and imposing their beliefs and extorting the settlements surrounding the region. It's not like it's any different than what goes on in the real world now.

One would think that MIT would be like another Vault City. On a pedestal above the wasteland; with enclosed gardens and an interior government; not just a lawman.
There should have been more clean (self respecting) communities in FO3; even if they hadn't had access to a GECK. Certainly the BOS & Enclave would of (should of) had spotless premises.

Well, there's the civil war deciding the outcome of a conflict that concerns the entire province, and which will have long lasting effects in the future with the ultimate great game between the Thalmor and the Empire. There's the entire deal with the Blades that will decide what may well be the very survival of a ancient military order that had been hunted for decades. There's also a lot of smaller quests dotted around, like Saadia and Kematu, or the forsworn conspiracy in Markarth.

You've said that a thousand times, and have yet to explain why a piece of art has the same attributes and the same value as a tool. If you're going to keep using that anology, please explain why a videogame is a functional piece of equipment that is intended to do a specific and exclusive purpose in some line of work, and that changing something about it would not do its intended and functional purpose.

Do you see it though? Is it mentioned in ending slides? Or do you just do it, get experience and walk away? My experience with Skyrim was colored by the number of game breaking bugs that I personally experienced (obviously this differs per person). I have finished the game and put hundreds of hours into it, but it didn't leave a very good taste or impression. For me it was dull, repetitive, lackluster and felt like they gutted everything to cater to people who couldn't be bothered to think. It was definitely a wake up call and it is what forced me to be so worried about Fallout 4.

Obsidian has ending slides on top of ending slides to show the consequences of your actions. I felt like stuff I did mattered. Skyrim just felt like a whole lot of fus ro dah (sp?) and not much else.

I didn't learn about Fallout 1 and 2 until after playing Fallout 3 for what it is worth. I was a big TES fan until Skyrim and while I had an enormous amount of fun with F3, I can't help sympathizing with the fans of the originals.

I do not understand why you want an explanation for this.

*And what about the answers to your other two questions?

But since you've asked... As a commercial artist, I have personally seen the shock (and sometimes dismay) of people at events with caricaturists (artists), where they choose an artist based on what they've seen them draw... They always expect a similar style, yet some caricature artists can change their style every sitting, and one caricature might look like a pen and ink portrait, and the next an extreme exaggeration (as caricatures should be). I have seen people sit expecting a portrait and gotten a biting caricature instead. All in fun or not, some folks are hurt by it; others simply not expecting what they got... still others are fine with anything that looks good... Some are embarrassed to have sat for it in public.

I mention this because people go to a known artist expecting a known style ~not copies of past paintings, but clearly of the expected style. Who would anticipate a Picasso style from Sargent or Rockwell? (Of course Rockwell might have played that joke).

Who would expect a timeless first person adventure sim from the Fallout series, and who would expect a timed turn based tactical RPG of the TES series?
And why would anyone want either from the other? When you think of great platformers ~does TES come to mind? Why should it? Yet am I mistaken that you'd not think that TES6 as a Castlevania clone would seem oddly out of place? Would think that TES6 is appropriate ~whatever the design the next team decides? Am I wrong?

One can of course ignore the anology, and posit that Bethesda itself is like the artist with a known style, (and I can agree with that premise), but the anology considers the previous [in this case Fallout titles] as the known style, and FO3 as uncharacteristic of the series.

Take your time, but please release the game soon.

A Little joke there. Torn between the two?

[/quote]
Enclave: =/ But they have been so done to death (literally). They aren't cats with nine lives.

As for the bottle cap argument: It's been at least three years since Fallout 3. If the game exists in a tech based region like MIT, it would stand to reason they would have created and successfully implemented a more realistic currency like I dunno.. paper money?

Issues with the towns/cities/residences: Again if it's a Boston game, then I suggest the area to be similar to Vault City. They have massively advanced technologies to create androids and slave labor, so there shouldn't be any of the rubble EVERYWHERE and filthy disgusting residences that are ready to fall apart (with skeletons in their bathtubs). Reasonable defenses would mark the exterior of a raised wall of concrete or stone (not slapped together with pieces of sheet metal like Megaton).

Humans built the pyramids and incredible places like Rome through the work of HUMAN slaves. Wouldn't it be reasonable for android slaves (presumably stronger than humans) to create just as spectacular infrastructures with our advances technologies and sciences in far less time?

With their plentiful resources they could also establish robot patrols to eliminate dangers in surrounding settlements. For their protection they could extort taxes from the settlements. It would only make sense for advanced irrigation systems and thus increased produce production and agriculture.
[/quote]


A city secretly ruled by the Institute. Where most of everyone is a droid or brainwashed. Sort like tranquility lane but in the size of a city. Or what happened in solsthiem where everyone was hypnotized and had no recollection of anything insidious or evil. Ide like to see the Institute do something like that. Maybe not as big as a real city, but apearing as such an untainted place that it looks like a replica old world town with brainwashed citizens and droids. Also reminds me of the movie west world.

Maybe the main character should start out being raised in such a town not realising the Institute was behind it all. And no indication of what date it is in the fallout universe until certain events let you realize your not In the prosperous years before the war.


Just a quick idea.

Doesn't the game itself remind one of West World?

__________

Pogs... Pogs make less noise than bottle caps.

*But MIT should be using campus scrip, or shuttle tokens.

This only continues the black vs white battle of good and evil. I think it's best to throw an outsider into a foreign world where they can learn the region's history and political strife on their own. This way they can objectively view the situation rather than subjective views being thrust upon the player. **Not saying your idea wouldn't work, but just that it needs to be done in a way that avoids clear cut good and bad.

Even if the theme is slave rebellion (which would literally be a copy/paste of The Pitt.. And very, very lazy) then they would need to be gray as well. Although slavery is atrocious, I found myself siding with the Pitt simply because of their ideals. They weren't simply slavers for the sake of it, but rather to cut themselves a place in the world and to fend off the horrors outside their walls.

Personally, I don't care what shade of gray they paint any faction.. So long as it IS gray and I can objectively view the situation, really come to feel and understand the factions and their ideals. The BoS and Enclave were extremely lazy I felt. The NCR, House, Legion on the other hand was perfect. I'm not saying to copy New Vegas' story, but to have factions that the player can relate to or sympathize with. I want political strife that requires the player to pay attention rather than these guys are good guys and these guys are bad guys.. Oh and even though you're an evil character.. You're forced to be good. (The Enclave choice wasn't really a choice unless roleplaying an idiot character)

But that's the best kind of morality in a story.

I'd welcome if the Institute were neither introduced nor generally presented as antagonists. Vault City wasn't for example (I don't want a VC clone, but it's very easy to avoid that - same with Big MT).

I'd love to see the Institute introduced as one of the first locations the player visits. I'd also love to see it being primarily set underground, not on the outside.

And I'd love them to fully embrace the android technology to the point where their interiors are decorated with human-like structures and statues, as well as computer terminals with human faces, that talk to you.

MIND AND HAND REMAIN. THESE MERITS WILL OVERCOME ANY OBSTACLE AND SHAPE THE FUTURE OF A WORLD IN RUIN.

@Gabriel: I disagree. But there's only one way for a moral dilemma - a true one - to work. The natural injustice of the world, combined with a decisive situation with no way to return.

It's how you make me care.

I agree, if they are to introduce androids then don't half ass it. Like I was saying, completely clean and newly built structures (not tossed together junk heaps like those scrap metal houses or megaton), like Vault City-ish. A clean and unparalleled city which WOULD be a utopia if not for some fault like Vault City's superiority complex perhaps.

They should also completely embrace the technology. Venders and automated systems that are prototype or stripped androids (without the skin? or just a portion of the body?). Has it been stated whether the androids are artificial intelligence? If so then this should be implemented in a lot of areas as well. Stuff like the Sink's vender unit and autodoc for instance (but actual AI). It should really blur the lines of right and wrong as well. Regardless of being artificially created, they do possess intelligence.

Regarding Gabriel's comment: I'm fairly certain he was joking (I could be wrong though).

We need a clear set of morals presented by the game and the best way to create a story for the player to care about is to present them with something that is objectively evil. Whoever 'fights' the evil is up for question though, there could be multiple quest paths but all of them should be good, no matter what way you look at it. Because we, as a people, know in our hearts what is truly wrong and what is truly right and moral ambiguity is only a curtain that some story writers use to hide their own immorality, trying to justify the bad things they do.

No. We need a clearly defined storyline where we go up against something evil. Something we can unite against. And while the player should be allowed to be evil (for roleplaying), moral ambiguity has no place in a good story.

Ok, but the capital Evil should imo be the status quo, not a faction. All factions should work to end this status quo for the better - with differing ideals that lead to a clash.

An evil faction is boring in my opinion, at least as a prime antagonist. My Commonwealth story is a nice scenario without evil primary factions - only good ones, all joinable or helpable - that still clash, because they have differing ideals. Of course they aren't White Knights In Shining Armor. WKISA are boring, because they don't exist aside from a very few individuals - that don't make a faction. Same goes for absolute evil.

This all depends on the person's own experiences though. Clear cut right or wrong in one culture isn't so clear cut in another. It's one of the reasons that anthropology and sociology even exist. This "as a people, know in our hearts" doesn't exist in the sense that you are talking about. We as people are shaped, quite extensively, by our environments. ***People have throughout human history taken the lives of others for their beliefs of right or wrong. In the end it's just senseless killing though.

Not when the story of good vs. evil has been told thousands of times across many different mediums across all of history. Put your 'good vs. evil: pick a side' against a story with two or more groups with different ideologies that are contingent on each groups individual culture and philosophy all vying for a resource or territory.....

The latter sounds much better to me.