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.
(Kind of off topic): Wouldnt it be cool to play as a GHOUL for once?
well being a ghoul would get you into a lot of fights with people and they would have to scrap the entire radiation concept.
I also think that they just have so much story they can tell and enhance that they could get a lot of games out of it. Maybe you can start out in the Brotherhood of Steel in the next one. Although they may all be dead by then in the west coast.
So my idea on Fallout 4's location is that it's going to be set in California. I have a couple reason's for thinking this. Firstly, Bethesda likes to set their games in areas that had a lot of diversification in terms of biomes and weather, and because California has a lot of this it would make for interesting gameplay. Secondly, as some people have mentioned before, Jason Bergman (of Bethesda) was quoted as saying "You'll get no tips from me. But the Mojave Wasteland was a fun place to explore, wasn't it?". Now this could either be a misdirect, or hinting at the fact that it may be set in a similar location. If so, California would make a great setting. Thirdly, in a fairly recent game update (within the last 3 months) Fallout: New Vegas was updated with a new location right outside of Primm. It was named something like "The New California Drive-In". It was a partially destroyed drive in movie place that had nothing significant about it- no hidden items, no safes, no enemies, nothing. Yet Bethesda felt the need to include it? Interesting... And finally, California seems like a likely setting as it has numerous tourist attractions that are almost always included in the Fallout games. Also, many factions could return such as the NCR (obviously) and The BoS. Just somethings to think about.
Thirdly, in a fairly recent game update (within the last 3 months) Fallout: New Vegas was updated with a new location right outside of Primm. It was named something like "The New California Drive-In". It was a partially destroyed drive in movie place that had nothing significant about it- no hidden items, no safes, no enemies, nothing. Yet Bethesda felt the need to include it? Interesting...
That was used for the add-on "Old World Blues" I think that's the one your talking about.
Well I don't think that California will be the place since it is to close to NV so the games will look alike. Bethesda never did this in general so I don't think they would do now. I personally hope they go for a mountainy area. They never did that and it would be interesting.
fallout 3 was an epic game but i think what happened was this"Well the elder scrolls sereis was an epic success but it doesnt appeal to those who like the fps genre so how can we get it to apply to the fps genre well by making an fps based on the same engine but to create somthing that works on the same engine we need a storyline that fits the actions of the npcs a lawless land post apacolypse but how can we make it applie to retro gamers by adding the emersive storyline of a classic post apacolypse game fallout." That sound about right to everybody
Would be good if they made the game in a big city, like NY and then made the game more of survival. I played 2, and 3 was crap compared to it. The NV SHOULD have been the third. It continue the same cool game from 2, despite some stuff I didn´t liked. But the D.C.game should never has been made. If they made it AFTER the NV It would be better. Oh, and I played 3 before 2, so I am not an adult that doesn´t knows how to play it (nothing against adults that play games) I am 14.And D.C. game was a total fail. the mutants were bananas, the raiders were not raiders, were armed ****oles that or didn´t knew shooting, or were like trained military personel. The Fallout 3 was a piece of s**t compared to others. Anyway was better than CoD =)
Maybe DLC´s could be in islands, mountains, and not in the game. I liked point lookout and operation anchorage a lot, but broken steel shoul be part of the game, instead of a DLC. It make me feels that I bought a Demo and Broken Steel was THE game. shure the Demo was big but the fun was with blowing up the Capitol xD. Anyways I got it by torrent, so I didn´t payed either xD.
Well im not sure if it was better then skyrim. Skyrim was deemed possibly the best game ever made and now the expatiation is coming out BUT seeing how well it did id LOVE to see a FO-4 and see what improvements(if any) was able to be made from FO-NV for i have the ultimate edition and it is freakin sweet and don't see how Bethesda can top either FO-NV of Skyrim but id love to see them try
[/quote]Would be good if they made the game in a big city, like NY and then made the game more of survival. I played 2, and 3 was crap compared to it. The NV SHOULD have been the third. It continue the same cool game from 2, despite some stuff I didn´t liked. But the D.C.game should never has been made. If they made it AFTER the NV It would be better. Oh, and I played 3 before 2, so I am not an adult that doesn´t knows how to play it (nothing against adults that play games) I am 14.And D.C. game was a total fail. the mutants were bananas, the raiders were not raiders, were armed ****oles that or didn´t knew shooting, or were like trained military personel. The Fallout 3 was a piece of s**t compared to others. Anyway was better than CoD =)
I beg to differ. I liked FO: 3 I think it was about as good as NV. It had a little bit more of a survival air to it because it was less civilized.
Well im not sure if it was better then skyrim. Skyrim was deemed possibly the best game ever made and now the expatiation is coming out BUT seeing how well it did id LOVE to see a FO-4 and see what improvements(if any) was able to be made from FO-NV for i have the ultimate edition and it is freakin sweet and don't see how Bethesda can top either FO-NV of Skyrim but id love to see them try
Yeah its gonna be a challenge to make another of their games be deemed greater that skyrim or FO: NV until there is a big change in game engines (FO: 3 and FO: NV used practicaly the same engine. and share a lot of things in common. This is similar to Half Life 2.) or gameplay.
Anyways I got it by torrent, so I didn´t payed either xD. [quote]
I live in the poorest country in the world (Liberia, west Africa (yes i am white, im a missionary.)) so I at first got a pirated copy of FO: 3 at the only store in the country that sold good games. And I now torrent a lot because I'd have to wait for someone to be coming over here or ship it on a container (Which is the only two options for XBOX games) which takes months. Or I can torrent them and it only took 5 days for FO: NV ultimate edition.
