I know that when Bethesda bought the Fallout series they had rights to make 3 games but now they have full rights anyways so we may get more games. Jason Bergman when asked for hints said. "You'll get no tips from me. But the Mojave Wasteland was a fun place to explore, wasn't it?". Not sure if it means anything or if he is just messing with us but i'm guessing the latter.anyways i just want to know your thoughts on it.
I would love to have another Fallout. I'm currently playing Fallout: New Vegas and I love it. Fallout 3 was also amazing. The new one should be based in New York or something of the sort.
Fallout 3 was amazing, fix a couple of glitches and it would be prime. Fallout New Vegas was really good too, but it seemed like a download from the original. The gun mods were a good effect, and the leveling at the beginning (perks) were a nice touch. I feel like they shouldn't go any farther with the franchise.
Well I think they should do mid America now, because they already did the East and West coast. So it would only seem natural to do Mid America. But I would support this game 110%!
Here's the thing about Bethesda. They ruined Fallout for people who have actually played Fallout 1 & 2. Don't get me wrong, the Bethesda series was not bad , it just wasn't good. They're the victim of eight year olds playing it and saying after 'UMG SO GUD BEST GAME EVERRRR'. I know a few people that despise the game. New Vegas, though, that was different. It was a step-up from the less-awesome Fallout 3. Onto my point... They should've stopped at Fallout 3, and as I said, Fallout New Vegas wasn't bad, but it wasn't good either. If they, say, expanded on the ideas of Fallout 1 & 2, they would've made a sequel to THE best RPG on the world. Again, Fallout 3 & new vegas weren't bad games. It's just that Bethesda did what they do with every series, they melted it down into a pile of crap and left it to die. They really should have stopped after Fallout 3.
Here's the thing about Bethesda. They ruined Fallout for people who have actually played Fallout 1 & 2. Don't get me wrong, the Bethesda series was not bad , it just wasn't good. They're the victim of eight year olds playing it and saying after 'UMG SO GUD BEST GAME EVERRRR'. I know a few people that despise the game. New Vegas, though, that was different. It was a step-up from the less-awesome Fallout 3. Onto my point... They should've stopped at Fallout 3, and as I said, Fallout New Vegas wasn't bad, but it wasn't good either. If they, say, expanded on the ideas of Fallout 1 & 2, they would've made a sequel to THE best RPG on the world. Again, Fallout 3 & new vegas weren't bad games. It's just that Bethesda did what they do with every series, they melted it down into a pile of crap and left it to die. They really should have stopped after Fallout 3.
i don't see where they went wrong, i played all the games, and i like NV and Fallout 3, as much as i like 1 and 2, they really don't seem all that different, other than the graphics,
Well, to each their own, but it was my own opinion. I honestly feel like they ruined it, and not just because Fallout 3 and New Vegas were some of the ****tiest games I've ever played. I mean, New Vegas had some fun in it, but it was so linear. And they're very different. Fallout 1 & 2 had the turn-based, while New vegas and Fallout 3 had the idiotic AI who couldn't do **** in a real-time battle. The Supermutant behemoths in Fallout 3 were too easy just for that reason.
i didn't like the turn base, it's why i loved the not so turn based combat of Tactics, and the AI is alright, i've seen worse and i've seen better (especially Valve's AI)
Well to all of you noobs someone in Bethesda (Todd I think) said that the entire reason they went out an bought the entire franchise was because they said thew weren't just going to leave the game off at 3 games. And that they intended to continue to make many games.
Here's the thing about Bethesda. They ruined Fallout for people who have actually played Fallout 1 & 2. Don't get me wrong, the Bethesda series was not bad , it just wasn't good. They're the victim of eight year olds playing it and saying after 'UMG SO GUD BEST GAME EVERRRR'. I know a few people that despise the game. New Vegas, though, that was different. It was a step-up from the less-awesome Fallout 3. Onto my point... They should've stopped at Fallout 3, and as I said, Fallout New Vegas wasn't bad, but it wasn't good either. If they, say, expanded on the ideas of Fallout 1 & 2, they would've made a sequel to THE best RPG on the world. Again, Fallout 3 & new vegas weren't bad games. It's just that Bethesda did what they do with every series, they melted it down into a pile of crap and left it to die. They really should have stopped after Fallout 3.
I assume you mean that they just weren't the same as 1 and 2 and didn't have the same feel. And that they didn't follow the canon well maybe. I think that a lot of people like Fallout New Vegas more than Fallout 3 because New Vegas is just so much more civilized and there is more communities. I think that there are pros and cons to that. I kind of liked the survival feel to fallout 3 but i think that the town missions are less repetitive.
Oh and I forgot to mention in my last post that they are making a fallout MMO(RP?)G (Massive Multiplayer Online Game). Origionaly interplay was making it because Bethesda had a deal with them but they couldn't meet the requirements so Bethesda took over.
I personally loved FA:NV and FA:3 and cant wait for another one if they do release it, it would be fantastic...but i would love for it to be set somewhere with a BIT less sand.
(Kind of off topic): Wouldnt it be cool to play as a GHOUL for once?
