Personally, I think non-combat skills would have been more useful, locations would have better back stories, and NPCs would have been more memorable. Do you think it would have turned out a better overall game, or worse? What do you think would have been different?

It might have had some better quests but the game world itself would svck.

More bugs, lags and freezes? No thanks. I like Bethesda and Elder Scrolls is their game, and so is Fallout. I like what they do with those games, and while I like some features Obsidian put into New Vegas, it was still heavily based on the standard Bethesda games. I would rather Bethesda keep making Elder Scrolls, it just gets better and better in my opinion. Sure they've taken some things out that I want back in but I still think Skyrim is the best ES game to date.

I could only imagine if this game could have more bugs I cringe at the thought.
It would definitely be more quest driven, probably expanded upon the New Vegas concept of quest.
There would be less of a focus on exploration, they would toss up some invisible walls like in NV.
There would possibly be more rations to join with more interesting interactions and meaningful ones at that.
Also the map size would probably be smaller as the open world setting is not area they excel in.
But the star of this game is the world and exploration and Bethesda should keel their flagship franchise untouched by any other developer and keep it to themselves. I preferred Fallout 3 over New Vegas because there was more of a focus on exploration in FO3.

A worse overall game, better in some aspects and worse in more.

Better Quests with branching paths and deeper consequences, NPC interaction and overall depth. Probably would have been buggier. i don't know if it would be better or not, but i do know obsidian's storytelling is great.

I liked the workbenches and stuff in NV, and how NO ONE in the game was essential.

Fallout for Obsidian and TES for Bethesda.

It wouldn't be anything like the Skyrim we know. The folks at Bethesda have been with the Elder Scrolls series forever, and nobody can match the quality or feel they accomplish with the franchise. Obsidian is a good developer, but looking at their latest projects: New Vegas which was mildly successful and Alpha Protocol which was a flop. Obsidian's storytelling is a little more involving, but the dungeons they made in New Vegas felt like filler re-used content with few to no story elements to most non quest locales, while Bethesda has made exploration of the worlds they create so enjoyable. I would prefer Bethesda's style of game design every time.

fixed

What people fail to realise, is that New Vegas was (supposedly) buggy for two reasons: one, it used an outdated engine that was already pretty damn buggy, and two, Bethesda really dropped the ball when it came to the deadline (let them delay it longer, if it means more testing!)

So now that that's out of the way, I think there would have been fewer followers, but they would have been much, much more memorable, and I feel there'd be harder choices to make when it came to things like the Dark Brotherhood ("No, I'm not killing that 'guy on the boat', thank you very much!" for example).

However, while Obsidian is better at writing, they're worse at level/world map design.

Fallout New Vegas was so linear it was ridiculous. It was cleverly disguised, but linear nonetheless. You left the vault, then what choice did you have. End that cute little fued going on in town. Then what's next? Head in a predetermined path to New Vegas, doing the exact same quests the entire way. Then this is where you get some imitation of choice. Bad guys or Good guys? Doesnt matter. You are still doing the same exact quests in the end. And guess what you got when you wanted to start over? The same thing over again. I never ever like the earlier game in the series. For me, its an unheard of trait, but Fallout is the only game where I like the original Fallout 3 more. So if obsidion made it instead of the Gods among men we call Bethesda, we would have got iron sites on our bows, and we would get cut down by death claws if we decided we wanted to go to solitude first instead of retrieving the Claw. Beth knows what the hell they are doing with the elders scrolls, and they have been with the series since it was a wee lil' Daggerfall, and i would trust no other mortal with the design of The Elders Scrolls.

So uh, yeah Bethesda + Obsidian together would be a pretty legit alliance. Agree?


You were never in a vault.

It would have been a failure in sales, metacritic and everything. Obsidian should stay away from open world games, they're only good at railroad narrative.

Agreed. They both do some things better than the other, and they could stand to benefit from a joint effort.

More story driven than the 'here's a few tales, but tell it yourself' that I play these games for. Better as an rpg, worse as an action/rpg. More talking, deeper npcs, better written quests, more need for certain skills in certain situations, but though I disagree that NV is linear, less of a sense of freedom. A better game perhaps, a worse virtual playground. Worst of all, it would possibly be so story driven, it would have an ending, not something I personally want to see in TES.

I would actually like it better if Bethesda focused on TES.

I would actually like it better if Bethesda focused on Fallout.

It would have been worse for me, I'm used to the Bethesda studios touch in all Bethesda studios games that's why I like to play them and that's why I'm here. I'm rather indifferent to Fallout franchise, I don't like the setting. But Innos forbid they ever let another developer do a TES, I won't buy it.

Well that's you, a lot of people like Fallout as well.


I honestly want them to release Fallout next, then a new ES, and so on.

The story quests and npcs would be much better then they are now. Story is obsidian's better half while gameplay is their great flaw if obsidian had ahold of skyrim it would have had MANY large side quests that would be hard to beat and rewarding and you would remember them for a long time to come, Dont get me wrong bethesda had some good quests in skyrim but really the only good ones were daedric and the main quest and theives guild the rest to me were just fetch quests and that one rare quest that made you say wow did'nt expect that. npcs would have had much more to them they would remember you they would know what you've done they would hate you or love you or not really know you and to the day I die I will say if bethesda took obsidian in and they worked to make games obsidian does story/npcs/quests while bethesda does gameplay and the world they would make a very very great game.

If Chris Avellone is writing, you can bet the story would be flawless. Otherwise, expect more bugs.

On this we must disagree, Bethesda has always been at the helm of its tkagshil franchise and that is and always will be TES.

Can someone explain precisely what was wrong with the world design in New Vegas? Fallout 3 was repetitive metro tunnels, New Vegas had world cohesion and believability.

Obviously its me.
People can like Fallout just the same in the hands of another developer just like when the IP belonged to Black Isle.