Ew.Arachon said:Oh... How about resurrecting that promising game known as "Van Buren"?
How about we work in a Brotherhood of Steel expedition to Europe? Now that would be interesting...daviejjd said:Oh yeah you're right in the Fallout games the rest of the world just suddenly vanished and you just had America floating around in space, i think London would be great because there are loads of landmarks and it would be the next target after the USA, the problem with setting it in the 20's would be that nukes hadn't been invented.quack35 said:But Fallout is about America.Sindre1 said:London with a 1920s feel.
I want to know what happened in Europe.
no no no guys that's crazy fallout is about........................vault boy! they need to stick to their rootsdontworryaboutit said:Just try and imagine the twisted wreckage...it would be unreal.quack35 said:Hmm... that would certainly be a change for the franchise.dontworryaboutit said:My guess is it'll take place in a post-nuclear war environment.
lasherman said:i heard they're making a new one called fallout: new vegas, so im assuming they're planning on making it take place in las vegas
If you've seen anything about New Vegas, it says that the bombs didn't actaully HIT Las Vegas, but the surrounding area, so the strip shouldn't be destroyed, but it will still be a Fallout in that there is mutation, radiation, and everything else. But New Vegas is supposed to be a still thriving city...RyQ_TMC said:Idea number 1: Not made by Bethesda.
On a more serious note, I'd gladly see something like Vault City from F2. You know, a Fallout-universe location which is not a hellhole at first sight (granted, VC turned out to be less pleasant, but still...)? As much as I grew accustomed to the brownish-grey Wasteland from previous Fallout games, it would be nice to see more varied environs.
Let it rest in peace, for God's sake.Arachon said:Oh... How about resurrecting that promising game known as "Van Buren"?
I actually haven't seen any Fallout 3 hate in this thread, only love for Fallout 1 and 2. I myself didn't play Fallout 3 because I don't have a PC that can handle it.Pickel Surprise said:Also, to all the Fallout 3 haters: If you prefer Fallout 1 & 2, that's great. If those are your favorite games, then I'm happy for you. If you truly believe that Fallout 3 is the worst game ever made, that's fine. Just don't go running around spewing that anyone who enjoys Fallout 3 is somehow a blight on the face of the earth.
I'd say no to the hunger thing, considering how fast time goes in that game, as well as the fact that if you have enough food to last the amount of time, you'll be doing a quest you can't fast-travel from (E.G. - Broken Steel DLC quests are very lengthy, and don't let you fast travel, because they all take place in a small area seperated from the rest of the map)and most likely end up overencumbered, or be stuck leaving some heavy, yet phat loots.Exictednuke said:better aiming and cross hairs when not using vats, better custom weapons system preferably a system involving salvaging gun parts and then working to make new weapons. visible weapons damage that make sense for example a broken barrel would result in poor accuracy, a busted stock means more recoil. a realistic a person (EX. your character can die of hunger), the ability to Melle with your gun (which could potentially result in damage to your weapon), and a much improved karma system
azncutthroat said:Well, what created the American Fallout world is the war between China and America. Britian wasn't involved if I'm correct.daviejjd said:Oh yeah you're right in the Fallout games the rest of the world just suddenly vanished and you just had America floating around in space, i think London would be great because there are loads of landmarks and it would be the next target after the USA, the problem with setting it in the 20's would be that nukes hadn't been invented.quack35 said:But Fallout is about America.Sindre1 said:London with a 1920s feel.
I want to know what happened in Europe.
IMO: What Bethesda failed at doing was realizing that Fallout 3 was not in the TES series.Parallel Streaks said:Because they took the game and made it into something it's not, it's an FPS. It didn't capture the feel at all, they have robots, they have a reliable source of food enough to feed cities without any visible agriculture or food sources.stevetastic said:o rly!lasherman said:i heard they're making a new one called fallout: new vegas, so im assuming they're planning on making it take place in las vegas
sorry couldn't resist anyway why do all fallout fanboys hate fallout 3 and bethesda?
fallout 3 was a really good game and it captured the feel of post nuclear apocalyptic wasteland really well.
anyway new vegas isn't being made by bethesda
The choice system is very simple, the customisability is empty, even with all the sliding customisation bars, you can't make a mentally retarded brute who can't speak by giving him 1 intelligence, and you can't give your character a back-story seeing as you play it out in that dull mess known as childhood.
If they'd renamed it and every other thing in the game and called it "Futureblivion" then I would accept it as a good game, but it doesn't deserve to be a part of the Fallout franchise, or it could have at least not put the number on the end. that number means it's officially a direct sequel, rather than a spin-off like Tactics.
I understand that Bethesda was trying to appeal to a mass audience, and a lot of people enjoy it, but by doing that they took out a lot of the depth and complexity that Fallout was MEANT to be, and giving us a shallow FPS with the illusion of choice.
Fallout 4? Bring back Chris Avellone and make it all good again.
/End Fanboy Rant
(Oh, and flame away, I realize that this was a biased and fan-boyish comment, but dammit, I think I'm entitled to it after playing through that game thoroughly just so nobody can say I didn't give it a chance)
It also wouldn't make sense since only America and China got nuked.Chipperz said:I wouldn't mind seeing it set in a completely urban landscape like New York City, or maybe even somewhere that isn't America? The ruins of Tokyo or Paris would be cool to explore...
Yes, because the rest of the world went on to live perfectly normal existances, free of ANY effects of a nuclear war. The buildings would be more intact, but nuclear winter would have screwed with the ecosystems and I'm fairly certain that most of the planet had picked a side by the point the war started, which would have plunged the rest of the planet into world war 3 which, if America is anything to go by, has left the planet unable to make long range radio transmissions...deathsong17 said:It also wouldn't make sense since only America and China got nuked.Chipperz said:I wouldn't mind seeing it set in a completely urban landscape like New York City, or maybe even somewhere that isn't America? The ruins of Tokyo or Paris would be cool to explore...