New York, the high buildings could provide the game with a vertical plane we've never seen before. towns could be fancier the higher up you go. And at lower levels more mutants and nasties appear.
That's where they need to branch out and create their own take on FO which has been solidly fixed in the Southwest. It's why DC was so jarring and a let down for me.Dr. McD said:Way better. But I don't like the Chinese remnants, sounds like the shitty obsession with the past vibe I got from Fallout 3, probably because Bethesda can't create their own villains so they have to bring back the Enclave.
Yes!!! Someone else who understands that more than anything we need to figure out 'when' as well as where.Elcarsh said:For me, it's not a question of "Where" as much as of "When", because, let's face it, we're staring down a boring arse Fallout universe. Every step into the future the series takes will inevitably move it away from the faux-50's-future setting, and who the hell wants that?!
I don't want to play a game about an up-and-coming society in some area of the US that doesn't look much like anything. You can only go so far before you run out of post-apocalypse, and what with New Vegas, we've bloody hit that point.
The particular itch that the series has always scratched for me is that of a post-apocalyptic wasteland in the ruins of an old civilization destroyed by a nuclear war. If we go far enough that we stop giving a shit about the apocalypse then the series is completely and utterly pointless. If I want to play an RPG set in a generic crapsack world, I don't buy a Fallout game.
So, I say they should jump back in time to relatively shortly after the nuclear war, and give us something memorable. Like Metro 2033, only with a story that isn't shit.
I believe they had according to the lore. China and the United States launched their missiles more or less at the same time at October 23'd, but Europe had already torn itself apart in their own resource-war, no doubt with some limited nuclear exchange of their own (My personal theory is that they emptied their stockpiles completly out of panic when the US and China went at it, however).Sigma Castell said:I don't think it should be another desert game, we had that in New Vegas. I think London would be a good idea, but only if they got the tube right. I doubt it would have been hit by that many bombs, as china would mostly have ignored europe, but maybe they could have their own sort of mini-muclear war in Europe?
I guess GTA: London, 1969 and GTA: London, 1961 snuck by under your radar, then.Combine Rustler said:That'd be like a GTA set in some other country.
I'm afraid the Fallout series is long-dead for you, then.Anthraxus said:Fallout is dead to me if it's in Bethesda's hands now.
Sounds like someone didn't play New Vegas. And better Bethesda than Interplay running it to the ground.Anthraxus said:Fallout is dead to me if it's in Bethesda's hands now.