Obsidian would “love to do Fallout: New Vegas 2″: dev talks dream pitch

until I saw the bank draft which said $5078, I didn’t believe that…my… friend could realy taking home money in their spare time on there computar.. there brothers friend has done this for under 9 months and just repaid the dept on their villa and purchased a new Mini Cooper. read more at….. BIT40.ℂOℳ

I would KILL for an isometric, turn based Fallout game from Obsidian. New Vegas was good but still not Fallout 1-2 worthy.

Don’t care much for LA, but another Fallout from Obsidian is always a good thing.

So it seems the new Fallout won’t be done by Obsidian? Sorry Obsidian fans, but i’m happy about that.

Nah, Fallout 4 will be done by Howard and co. and then when that’s out they’ll move on to Elder Scrolls five, that’s when the Obsidian/Fallout romance reignites.

…Or I’m completely wrong.

Fallout from Obsidian devs would be much better then clusterfuck from Bethesda and Howard that know nothing about Fallout and what it should be about.

Fallout:NV was excellent. Finished it two times. My second playthrough was about a character that was a complete pacifist. Finished all quests without killing a beast or a guy. That was fun.

“It’d probably be The Boneyard, which is from Fallout 1.”

I think that would be awesome. Fallout 1 locations were excellent.

@2, It’s Bethesda’s fault for making Fallout in to a shitty FPS with abilities.

@6 Wow, I actually agree with you this time!

@2 Me too! Until that happens though, Wasteland 2 fits the bill *very* nicely in the meantime.

Oh snap. That pretty much means they’d finally make San Fransisco. Easily my favourite spot from Fallout 2, or any Fallout.

Fallout 3 was not a bad game at all, it was typical of Bethesda’s focus on Exploration and questing rather than story. Fallout:NV was far more based on story and was far more “Fallout” than Fallout 3.

I enjoyed both games, but Fallout:New Vegas was the better game overall.
They did have the benefit of having an already established game design to build upon though. Unfortunately, I didnt play the game until 6 months after it was released and it was still so buggy that I couldnt finish the game properly. I got stuck at a point where I literally had to wait for a patch to continue playing. I got the patch and then ran into a bug where I was forced to make a decision i didnt want on the main quest just to be able to finish the game. I never ran into those issues on Fallout 3, never got stuck where I couldnt finish the game.
Both games were a bug fest, but Fallout:NV was far worse in my experience, on the Xbox 360.

I’d say the rewards for exploration were much better in Fallout: NV than in Fallout 3, which to me is probably the biggest reason why i should explore. Most places either had something interesting to find, or a story to tell.

Fallout 3 may not be a “bad” game, but it was still Fallout without all the things that make Fallout such a treasured memory for a lot of people.

Bethesda’s style strikes me as very “pseudo-realistic”, they aren’t willing to be very outrageous and crazy, and that’s a very bad fit for Fallout.

In Fallout 2 it didn’t take you very many minutes before someone was trying to make you fluff a porno. That’s not exactly the pinnacle of the series, but it’s just another example of its post-apocalyptic world which had clearly gone mad, and been left to either desperate, angsty idealists or complete psychopaths.

There was very little neutral ground there.

i dont really know what they should do but any new fallout is good for me. i dont care if its by bethesda or obsidian both made great games. But what i think would be a good idea is have one released by bethesda and one by obsidian ,and like 7 years from now make a game that they both work on and instead of it just being west coast or east coast meat somewhere in the middle like the rockie mountains. this would be badass

@13 I really care who is going to make a game based on the franchise I love, Bethesda has failed to develop their own franchise properly and while I don’t necessarily hate them for what they did to TES series, I certainly don’t want another Skyrim re-skin for Fallout. Comparing Fallout 3 with Fallout: New Vegas will reveal how much of a failure Fallout 3 ever was, just like when you compare Skyrim and Oblivion with Morrowind. There are a things that I absolutely love about Skyrim, like the combat system and it being classless, but there are a lot of other things that I hate to see them go with the re-skin process into Fallout 4.

@11 Bethesda made games don’t reward exploration anymore.

I must be one of the only bastards in here who loved Fallout 3 and barely liked New Vegas. I’m a trophy whore, so for me F3 was perfect. Every single trophy was a joy to get my hands on. For New Vegas, I had to do a whole load of stupid bullshit to snag the trophies…

Also, fucking Boone killed almost every living thing in Vegas, the bloodthirsty maniac. ^-^ Also, F3 had a kind of epic story, whereas New Vegas felt unimportant to me…

@15 but FO3′s story wasn’t that epic, while NV hasn’t an epic start but it was pretty much epic. I suppose it falls under the personal preference and one’s expectation from a story and the narrative. I liked the ending of Fallout 3 a lot though.

I am going to get a lot of hate for this, but I think Obsidian is better than Bethesda was with Fallout. They just put a lot more care into it. I would much prefer a fallout new vegas 2 over fallout 4.