If Obsidian wanted to set a DLC in a location from FO 1 or 2 : Fallout: New Vegas

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 12:05 pm

i voted for new areas only. never played anything but FO3 so old areas would still be new to me. maybe i should change my vote to the 3rd one...

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 9:26 am

I would kill to see some of the older game's areas in a way where I can actually see them instead of taking my character's word on it. Vault 13, Boneyard, Navarro's ruins, you name it, all in stunning 3D.

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 10:39 am

Vault 13, Boneyard, Navarro's ruins, you name it, all in stunning 3D.

Or the conversion makes them look like crap and completely tick off the older fallout fans.

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 2:43 am

:( WHY DOES EVERYONE NEED TO REHASH THE SAME THINGS? I love the original Fallouts they were great, but this is a new game so it should have new content. Besides, the majority of people who are going to buy FNV probably would have only played Fallout 3, so they wouldn't care for the old content and not really understand.

» Fri Feb 18, 2011 9:37 pm

I'd love to see how Junktown turned out after all these years! Necropolis would be cool aswell, as would Mariposa, despite it being blown to shreds :-P

The Glow aka West Tek would be awesome too, maybe it had a secret vault hidden beneath it that the Vault Dweller missed? Just brainstorming :rolleyes:

» Fri Feb 18, 2011 11:00 pm

Besides, the majority of people who are going to buy FNV probably would have only played Fallout 3, so they wouldn't care for the old content and not really understand. [/color]

Actually, I think a lot of them don't want to try out the old games because of the graphics and isometric turn-based combat. Or they have tried it out and just couldn't get into it.
So they figure that by having a DLC for the place that they could play through that area in 3-D and still get the lore.
Thing is, they can't.
If they can't/won't play the originals then a DLC for one of their locations won't fix anything.
It won't help them understand the old games or the old lore.
For that they need/have to play the old games.

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 2:11 am

Or the conversion makes them look like crap and completely tick off the older fallout fans.

Which is why I said in my post it's a double edge knife.

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 10:47 am

Or the conversion makes them look like crap and completely tick off the older fallout fans.

The likelihood of that happening depends fully on who's modelling. If Obsidian is doing it, since they're comprised of many of the guys that made those areas the first time 'round, they will come out just fine. If Bethesda does it...eh, close enough for the likes of me but the FO1/2 [censored] will be starting riots over it.

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 3:29 am

eh, close enough

If "close enough" would be enough, what would be the point of recreating them instead of doing something completely new?

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 12:34 am

We've already been at the old locations, why not make some use out of the DLC's to bring as much as we can of Van Buren forth?

Gonna go with Dan-o on this one. Francis, too. The Grand Canyon, if not included (which I doubt it is) would make a great DLC, since they content already exists in the Van Buren docs.

» Fri Feb 18, 2011 9:21 pm

I would kill to see some of the older game's areas in a way where I can actually see them instead of taking my character's word on it. Vault 13, Boneyard, Navarro's ruins, you name it, all in stunning 3D.

Or the conversion makes them look like crap and completely tick off the older fallout fans.

Direct (accurate) reproductions in 3d would disappoint all involved (fans & Devs alike). Fallout's locations were abstractions on the concepts. Vault 13 housed a thousand occupants, and took up the interior of a mountain. Also the best locations (like the Glow for instance) might never approach the same level of intensity in a 3d FPP format.

**Here though, is a pretty good Vault 15, done in the Source Engine.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7q71jAAakE

» Fri Feb 18, 2011 9:30 pm

Direct (accurate) reproductions in 3d would disappoint all involved (fans & Devs alike). Fallout's locations were abstractions on the concepts. Vault 13 housed a thousand occupants, and took up the interior of a mountain. Also the best locations (like the Glow for instance) might never approach the same level of intensity in a 3d FPP format.

**Here though, is a pretty good Vault 15, done in the Source Engine.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7q71jAAakE

Damn...Was that mod made post-fallout 3?

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 12:58 pm

I just don't want to revist an old location for nostalgia. This is the USA, and with a little creativity, there is ALOT of potential places to newly discover for us Fans.

I think, if handled properly revisiting nostalgic locations can be interesting and impactful. The key is to remove the nostalgia. I think a great example of this was when Solid Snake revisited Shadow Moses Island in MGS4. It was bleak, and bummed me out far more than it inspired nostalgia. I loved every second of it. If it is thematically relevant and logically sound, why the hell not?

» Fri Feb 18, 2011 9:26 pm

Damn...Was that mod made post-fallout 3?

I'm not sure of the date (that uploader was not the creator of the map); its been around a long time. I'm pretty sure it pre-dates Fallout 3 (and possibly Oblivion).

I think, if handled properly revisiting nostalgic locations can be interesting and impactful. The key is to remove the nostalgia.

I'd want anyplace that is reasonably on the map to be there (even if its finding a caravan trader who mentions, "...heading out to the coast, if you want to sign on", and stopping off in or near past locations). I do think that most of these places should be minor, and/or abandoned (but not entirely safe or without interest).

Modders might be able to do this too... :whistling:

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 12:50 pm

I'm all for a nostalgic trip to some old FO regions. I don't understand why some people think that if there areas where in the previous Fallout titles, there is nothing new that they can offer - there are a ton of plot development that Obsidion can create based on the different factions and quests from the earlier titles. So what's there not to like about this idea?

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 12:51 pm

I'm all for a nostalgic trip to some old FO regions. I don't understand why some people think that if there areas where in the previous Fallout titles, there is nothing new that they can offer.

Yeah you're right, let's just rotate the locations for each game and never have a new location.

Seriously though, yeah an old location could offer something new but the location has already been done.
It's in a game already.
...
...
Okay, let's try this in a different way:
Why would it be better to return to an area that has already been in a previous fallout title and which has it's story completed than having a completely new area where none of us have been before?

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 9:27 am

I would like to see New Reno again. That was my favorite place in Fallout 2 (Being a gangster is so fun). I would rather have New locations but if we could get an awesome looking New Reno I would be happy.

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 6:16 am

Why would it be better to return to an area that has already been in a previous fallout title and which has it's story completed than having a completely new area where none of us have been before?

Well... Players that have never been there before will be none the wiser of it's history, and those that have heard of these places will (hopefully) get a sense of it's history ~like a tourist visiting a Civil War battlefield; and the veteran players will be personally aware of the history (Like Duncan or Conner Macleod visiting Stonehenge and the Tower of London :laugh:).

*And they would be the ones to appreciate the subtlest references (like say... evidence of an abandoned Mordino drug lab in the medical wing of Vault 13).

» Fri Feb 18, 2011 10:38 pm

a mix of both kind, both DLC of new places and a rework of a old, it would be curius to see how Vault City faired for example.

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 6:51 am

I'm sure the developers could think up some convincing plot lines for returns to some old locations such as Mariposa or Navarro, but personally I'm not interested in revisiting old locations. I'd rather see new locations with new stories than old locations with new stories.

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 9:34 am

I'm sure the developers could think up some convincing plot lines for returns to some old locations such as Mariposa or Navarro, but personally I'm not interested in revisiting old locations. I'd rather see new locations with new stories than old locations with new stories.

Same here, however... having the older locations be present has a good effect. Like the existence of Mariposa and Vault 13 in FO2 (and realizing that NCR is Shady Sands).

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 10:26 am

Yeah you're right, let's just rotate the locations for each game and never have a new location.

Seriously though, yeah an old location could offer something new but the location has already been done.
It's in a game already.
...
...
Okay, let's try this in a different way:
Why would it be better to return to an area that has already been in a previous fallout title and which has it's story completed than having a completely new area where none of us have been before?

For the record, I personally want nothing but new locations, or locations that were only mentioned in past games or were supposed to be in Van Buren. I just started this thread to see what everyone else thought. :shrug:

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 4:45 am

Actually I would like a DLC that featured a lot of vaults just because I love exploring vaults and to see the different ones would be great.

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 12:50 pm

Actually I would like a DLC that featured a lot of vaults just because I love exploring vaults and to see the different ones would be great.

Note: This is not a thread to suggest brand new locations for DLC! Stick to locations that existed in Fallout 1 and 2 please.

:whistling:

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 1:20 pm

dog town, go sky scraqers and dark orange sky go