If I had to choose between TES and Fallout, I personally prefer TES, but I'd still rather they made Fallout 4 first. A change of pace keeps them fresh and gives ideas time to percolate off the clock, as it were. Alternating between two IPs is perfect, and it is Fallout's turn after Skyrim. I'd be happy for them to allow Obsidian to make another spin-off, but I wouldn't want Obsidian to make FO4. Obsidian has different strengths, but fundamentally I prefer BGS games.

Pretty much this, its Fallout's turn next. Whether Obsidian should make it or Bethesda, I'm unsure what I would prefer. In a perfect world it would be a collaboration of the best of both, but I'm unsure how workable that would be.

Either way, it should be Fallout 4.

NEW SERIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Love TES, but Fallout 4 should be next. Let's keep them spaced apart. Oh, and keep Obsidian's development team the hell away from it. kthxbye

or we let bgs do FO4 because if it werent for beth FO3 would have been top down turnbased outdated rpg.

i am pretty sure skyrim will occupy people for another 4 to 6 years.

Bethesda should stop making games like TES and Fallout, they should try and make a First-Person Shooter based in the TES world with Fallout mechanics while trying to emulate the playstyle of COD.

Oh god, I read the title as "Would anyone rather have six before Fallout 4?".

I love TES more, but I really also liked Bethesda take on the Fallout series and think Fallout 4 should be first... if only for some variety. Either way, I'd be getting a Bethesda-style, first-person sandbox RPG. However, following Skyrim, are they going to remove SPECIAL from Fallout, now? Anyway... then Fallout 4 could be the guinea pig for the next console generation while TES VI is better optimized to make use of that generation's hardware to allow for a more technically-sound TES VI.

Fallout 4 should come next although Beth needs to fix the flaws that Fallout 3 had.

Another Elder Scrolls game for me. I just don't enjoy Fallout as much as TES. :shrug:

Nah, if you want a new series look to other developers.

YES!

Maybe not every year though, just as long as they alternate between the two.

Edit - Also keep obsidian away from Fallout 4, as I really think they are just a lame development studio. Their own IPs are pretty much crap, and they didn't really do much with NV I thought. The framework for the game was already laid out for them, and they still managed to soil it a bit.

Don't get me wrong, I played a lot of NY, but I don't want Obsidian anywhere near Fallout 4.

Fallout just as long as Bethesda finally learned that Fallout isn't apart of The Elder Scrolls series. I hope they finally got that, when they let Obsidian make a Fallout Game for them.

Let them alternate between each release from each franchise.

Edit: What's wrong with Obsidian? All they missed, in my opinion, was the atmosphere. In those regards, Fallout 3 is superior. Other than that, both games played along in nearly identical manner, in terms of gameplay.

Fallout. Higher chance of appealing to me, unless it's just Skyrim with guns (how clever of me!).

New Vegas had the right atmosphere for the Fallout Series. Fallout is about progression, the rebuilding after a nuclear war. New Cultures learning to deal with one another (War. War Never Changes) Fallout takes place 84 years after the great war, and people already started building new towns and cities. They were farming, both plants and animals, they had a working economic system. Fallout 2, taking place 164 years after the great war, we see a Nation (NCR) expanding into Northern California, people becoming more advanced as they rediscover old tech. Even Fallout Tactics shows people rebuilding, farming and so on.

Fallout 3 had none of that. The Game is set 200 years after the great war of 2077 and yet it looks like the Great War happened a couple of weeks ago. No living trees, no farms, no nothing! People just sat around in radioactive crap holes for 200 years. It was by far the wrong setting for a game taking place 200 years after the nuclear war.

Another problem with it, is that DC was pretty much intact! It was the capital of Pre-War America, it should have been nothing but a radioactive crater the size of DC. Yet all but the white house is still there. When every other city, such as LA, San Franciso and Chicago have been nuked off the map. Even Las Vegas, though it was spared from much of the nuclear warheads that were aimed at it. The City still degraded and fell apart, over 200 years. Mr.House came along and fixed up the Strip, while everything else was taken back by the desert.

That's setting, not atmosphere. I liked the 50's atmosphere in Fallout 3, mostly thanks to the music as well the aesthetics of the game. Didn't care too much for the... wild west feel of New Vegas, it came off as rather small. But go on easy on me here, Fallout 3 was the first one I played. And no, do not recommend Fallout 1 and 2, I can't handle that top-down view. Or the way combat worked. All clunky and crap.

But you're right in the regards of progression and how Fallout 3 really missed that entirely. As if everyone in the Capital Wasteland had been living on irradiated food and scavenging for 200 years. But the atmosphere was superior. Vibrant and alive despite the conditions.

I'd rather have The Elder Scrolls 6, honestly. I love the Fallout franchise, but I'm looking forward more to Fallout Online (assuming it happens -- let's not discuss!) than I am to the next Fallout game in the main series. Plus, overall, I like TES more.

Not a big concern either way though. I am looking forward to Fallout 4.

No, FO>TES anyday.
Even if I'm over the SK boards. It's just the most active.

I wasn't a fan of Fallout 3, but liked NV. I still play Oblivion and, if it was available to me, I'd play Morrowind, too. If we only had TES games coming out, we'd be experiencing the beautiful and exotic environments that Tamriel provides, yet the Fallout games ( despite my love for Fallout 2 ) all have very similar environments.

I don't like Fallout. It broke my heart that they wasted time on it when they could have been making a new Elder Scrolls game.

That's my sentiment as well. However, look at how many people here exclusively play Fallout games! It's great that Beth is making more money, I'd say the budget for Skyrim was due in no small part by Fallout 3. It just svcks we'll have to wait, at the current development rate, about a decade* for another TES game after Skyrim.

Edit: *A bit of an overestimate. Four years at least, I'd say!

That's why I don't like Obsidian, they didn't really do anything with the IP given to them, except expand the canon. We got a mostly empty map, with fetch quests, and a lot of recycled assets from Fallout 3. The whole game felt like a big Fallout 3 mod, which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but if you've played Fallout 3 TO DEATH (like I have) then the whole game gets stale pretty quickly. Obsidian had the chance to really expand on great elements of FO3, and fix some of it's problems. Instead we got the same game, more or less, with new problems.

Plus, not many of Obsidian's games have been very good at all. They just come off as a sub par studio to me. I mean they were given this amazing framework to build a truly great game with, and they fudged it up (IMHO).

I'm not saying I wouldn't buy an Obsidian developed FO4, just that I would rather it be Beth developed.

Okay, I had forgotten all about that, yeah. I agree that there's a lot of recycled assets from Fallout 3. Earlier I used to feel it was like a large mod for Fallout 3 as well, but I have to say it doesn't feel like that anymore at least, in my opinion. But your complaints are definitely valid in technical terms. And yes, a Fallout 4 by Bethesda would be favorable, but that's because I'm a blind really devoted fan of them.