Bethesda "several years" into Fallout 3 development
During a Q&A with Gamasutra, Bethesda VP of PR and marketing Pete Hines gave a brief update on the status of Fallout 3. While Bethesda remains shy about showing off its baby, Hines did reveal that "[the development] team has ramped up," perhaps suggesting that our first glimpse at the game is not far away.Indeed, Hines reaffirms that Bethesda is "already several years into the project." So show us something, will ya! Pretty please?
[Via CVG]
See also:
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
ck @ Jan 26th 2007 11:40AM
Fallout was classic. So was #2. Like Lawlz, I hope it's not Oblivion with a post-apocalyptic makeover. Maybe the out effect - Mass Effect!
ck @ Jan 26th 2007 11:42AM
Man that joke was lame - I meant to say theY'll outeffect Mass Effect. I'm just glad there's no stars anymore, otherwise I probably would have had one taken away.
kdanarch @ Jan 26th 2007 11:45AM
It's going to be good. It's gonna be REALLY good.
But first you have to accept the fact it's never going to be the same as the old school Interplay/Black Isle titles.
Emil @ Jan 26th 2007 11:54AM
But then it can't be good, if it's like Oblivion. It WON'T BE FALLOUT.
I'm all for innovation and further development of titles, but Fallout never was a first person action-adventure with one choice "dialogues" where you played as a half-mute idiot (unless you chose to!) and solved everything with violence (unless you chose to!). That is what I fear Bethesda will create, because they themselves apparently believe that Oblivion, for some incredibly obscure reason, is a role-playing game. It isn't.
Matt @ Jan 26th 2007 11:55AM
For some reason people seem to think that the only thing Bethesda is capable of making is 1st person RPG's. The people at Bethesda aren't stupid. A 1st person Fallout would enrage the fans. I don't think it will be top down like the originals though. That graphic style would just look to dated. Most likely it will be 3rd person.
One thing Bethesda is good at is making detailed, expansive worlds which will translate very well to the world of Fallout. However, as kdanarch mentioned, Bethesda is not Black Isle and this isn't going to be the same Fallout that people remember playing in the first two.
kdanarch @ Jan 26th 2007 12:01PM
I'm sorry, but Bethesda can't do any more damage that they've already done with the fallout franchise between Fallout 2 and now. Maybe it'll enrage the Fallout fans (and I include myself as a Fallout fan), but in the end, the fans will have to learn to deal.
And they'll love the game, and they'll continue to love to bitch.
The universe is unfolding as it should.
I happen to like the first person RPG concept for it's level of immersion and if I can immerse myself into the world of Fallout as deeply as I can in Oblivion (if not deeper) then I don't care how it stacks up to the old games. I've been dying for a really deep post-apocalyptic game. I'm also looking forward to Hellgate: London.
Dot @ Jan 26th 2007 12:02PM
"However, as kdanarch mentioned, Bethesda is not Black Isle and this isn't going to be the same Fallout that people remember playing in the first two."
What's the point of calling it "Fallout" then?
...Brand recognition, and nothing more?
TheKingInYellow @ Jan 26th 2007 12:07PM
Bethesda is a fine choice for F3. I can't think it will come in an Oblivion-like package. Fallout combat is turn and skill based, period.
kdanarch @ Jan 26th 2007 12:11PM
It's called Fallout because it will continue the story of Fallout 1 and 2. It's thematically linked.
And just because it's gonna be in a big pretty engine with action doesn't mean it's any less of a Fallout game.
Fanboys have been crying about this thing since I heard about it years back, and the way I look at it, it's like underground cred. Like when you're into this band, and suddenly they get a record deal, and all these punks start coming out to the shows. Not only do you feel betrayed by the band, but you hate the fans. Prepare for that to happen to Fallout. People who have never heard of this game or cared to play the originals are gonna shit their britches over Fallout 3, and in contrast to the triumphant cheers of the masses, the petty squabbles of the "underground hardcore" will fail to be heard or cared about.
If you're gonna argue about how fallout should be turn based isometric forever, you might as well argue about old Star Trek episodes. It is a testament to your inability to adapt and embrace.
Killzig @ Jan 26th 2007 12:31PM
Whether it's ISO or TB doesn't really matter. Those are just the mechanics of it. The personality of Fallout is what's important and, as stated above in this comments thread, it's about having some impact on the story rather than just hacking through dungeons for predetermined plot points to be uncovered. That and the great characters/dialog.
roflcopter @ Jan 26th 2007 12:37PM
i'm more concerned about the dark, cynical humor of the earlier games than it being 1st person. and hopefully it won't require obscenly expensive hardware to run properly (that was also a good thing about fallout).
art direction > number of polygons and amount of normal mapping
man, i hope they don't fuck this up
J.Goodwin @ Jan 26th 2007 12:38PM
This is going to be one of those situations where they'll show the game and it will be scheduled to be on store shelves within 6 months. It'll take 9 months, though, of course.
kdanarch @ Jan 26th 2007 12:42PM
I've always had the impression that tragedy and comedy were two sides of the same coin.
Hopefully Bethesda sees it the same way and pumps it with as much dark humor and human treachery as they can ;)
Half the fun of Fallout was inevitably getting into those situations that were just a little too sticky. (Damn razorclaws...)
kdanarch @ Jan 26th 2007 12:43PM
*deathclaws
WTF is my mind today...
JohnQAnonymous @ Jan 26th 2007 1:00PM
I want my tactical turn based combat. That's as much a part of Fallout to me as the open-ended nature of the game and dialogue was.
If this is just Post Apocalyptic Oblivion, it's not Fallout, even if it does continue the story.
This is a GAME. It's not a movie or a book where by simply epanding up the story you expand upon the series. The gameplay is as much a part of the franchise as the story is. If you're trying to fix something that was bad, go for it. If it's part of what the fans of the series liked, you can't just scrap it and tell people to just accept it.
This is almost as devastating as the news about them transforming Shadowrun from a cypberpunk RPG into Counter-Strike.
It's NOT just the story and the universe. The gameplay is what fans of the game are hoping for. If you aren't going to include the gameplay we loved you're just pissing on us to try and bring in new fans. You may as well not even bother using the license.
Dot @ Jan 26th 2007 1:04PM
"It is a testament to your inability to adapt and embrace."
Go to hell.
Adapt and embrace what? The "dumbing down for extra sales" thing like what happened to Oblivion?
Because something sells well, doesn't mean it is automatically good, you know.
Seems like Bethesda got the rights to the Fallout brand just to promote a game that has nothing to do with its predecessors. Too bad either Obsidian or Troika(when it existed) didn't get the rights to the series' name-they could have done it right.
P.S. http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a392/davodavo/futureph2.jpg
Jake @ Jan 26th 2007 1:13PM
As long as Fallout keeps enough of its core components and extends the story, it is still Fallout. Changing the perspective and making the world more open doesn't totally make it a different franchise. Look at how much the oldest franchises in gaming have changed, like Zelda, Metal Gear, Final Fantasy, Mario, etc. They still have the same core elements as they did 15 years ago.
roflcopter @ Jan 26th 2007 1:13PM
#17
that picture reminded me, if this game gets a T rating heads will roll at bethesda...
and no, i'm not saying "mature" rating makes a game better (quite the opposite most of the time), but they just can't present fallout's humor in a T rated game.
gLitterbug @ Jan 26th 2007 1:13PM
Too bad Bethesda is only capable of making the same game over and over again. Ugly characters included. It's a good thing for fans and people who don't like their games though, as everyone knows exactly what they are going to get or rather leave on the shelf. Guess Fallout fans are out of luck though. I'm just glad they didn't pick up the Planescape license, as much as I'd like to see a game with the calibre of a Torment.
P.S.: Obsidian and Troika aren't Studios I'd wand to touch any of my favorite franchises either. Not after looking at NWN2.(and not like Troika is around anymore anyways)
whiny bitch @ Jan 26th 2007 1:20PM
Can I preorder this yet?
Thryon @ Jan 26th 2007 1:23PM
I have been waiting for Fallout 3 ever since the day I finished Fallout 2. I searched and salivated on every scrap of information I could find, but it always ended in disappointment. When Bethesda announced that they had purchased the rights to the Fallout name, I was overjoyed, but at the same time saddened knowing that Fallout would be put on the backburner once again as Bethesda was in the middle of Oblivion. Now reading this news has made my day. That and the fact that this game is headed to the Xbox 360 (not confirmed, but we know it is).
I do not share the negative views of some of the above comments. The fun in Fallout was never about the isometric view, or the turned-based fighting (which required a lot of planning), I always found the Fallout series to be so much fun because of the dark humour of the game. Also that Fallout 1&2 contained more hidden Easter eggs (including real Easter eggs) than any other game I cam remember. The games made reference to various movies, TV shows, and celebrities. It was impossible to explore without stumbling upon Monty Python, Star Trek, the Simpsons, or South Park references and jokes. In fact, if I was to list all the hidden jokes of this game, this would be a very long post indeed. As long as Bethesda keeps this type of humour, I will love it.
tacophiliac @ Jan 26th 2007 1:41PM
I have a hard time believing that the game will remain fully turn-based. Even when Fallout 2 came out it took flak for what was termed an "outdated turn-based system." Brotherhood of Steel's real time action with pausing worked relatively well once you got used to it even though the game itself was only mediocre.
Bethesda has certainly demonstrated the ability to design and execute detailed worlds with lots of non-plot related quests, but I hated Oblivion. That's my major concern, I just despised that game.
http://www.eatmybomb.com/archives/985
That and the fact that Bethesda is now, what, the fourth company to announce Fallout 3?
Matthew Lenz @ Jan 26th 2007 1:48PM
Its probably taking them so long cuz they are trying to figure out how to turn it into a FPS. :/
kdanarch @ Jan 26th 2007 2:44PM
> Dot
Oblivion was a good game. And I say that because in my pubescent hayday I played a ton of Daggerfall, and in my young adulthood, Morrowind. Certain aspects of the math behind the game were holding back the fun aspect of it. ('I just swung my sword at a rat 7 times and it didn't hit even hit once.')
Fallout... Yes. It's a wonderful game, and the level of control makes it very intuitive and fun to play with (perks, specializations, affinities, etc). The story is dark and yet funny... All of the greatest parts of this game are in the storytelling.
What you should be worrying about is not what game engine it runs, though it may be it simplified to some degree (Oblivion was only simplified in the areas that Morrowind players hated the most, like the lack of fast travel and that hit-roll.) or just innovated into a different incarnation, what you should be worried about are the people who are writing the characters and the story and painting the textures and building the levels.
Not what game engine it runs on or the mechanics of the game. We already know it's going to have deep RPG elements. The point here is immersion and fun.
Immersion and fun.
The goal of any good videogame.
I don't care that it isn't turn-based. I don't care that it isn't isometric. I don't care that someone else is doing it.
I just hope that it's done well.
I sure hope the Fallout 3 team has a good sick sense of humor. Just being fans of the first two doesn't necessarily make them qualified to make the third; I'll concede to that.
But I do know... the game will be immersive and fun.
Ian @ Jan 26th 2007 2:57PM
I think what was so great about Fallout was it's storytelling and it's wide open spaces. As previously said, Bethsheba has the ability to create a world needed for the series, but will the storytelling be on par with the previous 2 is the major question. No need for the FPS/Isometric/3rd Person debate, but preferably something in between Isometric/3rd person would be great.
But yeah, that's about it.
roflcopter @ Jan 26th 2007 3:04PM
# kdanarch
"But I do know... the game will be immersive and fun."
you know that because you know something we don't, or you just hope like the rest of us?
in any case i sure hope you are right...
Shagittarius @ Jan 26th 2007 3:11PM
Looking forward to new Fallout games...I hope they come with a cool 'what to do in case of a nuclear war' book like the original did.
They should get the artists who did the Wii manual to do the fallout boy artwork.
kdanarch @ Jan 26th 2007 3:23PM
#roflcopter
Just a guestimate from watching how much Bethesda has learned about rpgs over the years :P
I hope, confidently, that it will be fun. Where my faith wanes a little is hoping that it'll be fun enough to get addicted to for months at a time (I still play Fallout 1 & 2), and that there'll be enough in the world to do.
I hope that they overhaul the Radiant AI engine to make the whole world a little more... parasitic? ;)
ChubsMcGee @ Jan 26th 2007 3:39PM
I think Bethesda has stated that they will be doing it 3rd person because that is what they are good at. Bethesda seems hesitant to try something new for them if it is part of a very much loved franchise. And I think it is a good move for them. People know they can pull off a 3rd person RPG, or at least a large number of people agree with that.
And I think they have also stated it will be m rating. They understand that the humor will generally take them to this level, and thats fine with them. So it sounds like if it does get a T rating then it is because it just ended up like that and not because they targeted that rating.
roflcopter @ Jan 26th 2007 3:40PM
#kdanarch
fair enough, bethesda has indeed shown us multiple times that they can make great rpgs, and despite all of its faults, oblivion was a great game.
i just hope they wont bother with the scaling system this time, rpgs should make you feel weak and vulnerable at the beginning and completely badass towards the end.
Lawlz @ Jan 28th 2007 8:19AM
If they make it oblivion in a post apocalyptic setting i will hunt Bethesda down and dip them all in FEV.
Pip @ Feb 16th 2007 5:14PM
I just hope they can pull together a good addition to the current "Fallout World" Storyline. The graphics will be about equal if not better than Oblivion by the way so dont expect to be able to run it beautifully on the same computer you first played 1 and 2 on hehe. Designer being quotted as saying -
“We are overjoyed,” said Howard. “Fallout is one of my favorite games, and we plan to develop a visually stunning and original game for Fallout 3 with all the hallmarks of a great RPG: player choice, engaging story, and non-linearity.” -
Key words Visually stunning so probably will be designed for Vista sadly. Also stated that it will made for multi platforms and and with that they are of course looking for broad appeal. Cant really see a turn based consel game or well even a modern turned based rpg. Never the less Bestheda creates good, solid games. It may not live up to your fantasy Fallout continuation but it will be a stunning, entertaining game that both longtime Fallout fans and people that have never even played the series will enjoy.