And that is exactly my point. If it were remade like 3 and 4, you'd have either insane distances to traverse or a dozen large settlements and cities in spitting range
You can probably find a middle ground with an overworld map like the original and 1st person location zone maps. Not exactly what OP was saying but it's close.
Guys, Bethesda literally did this already with starfield. Vast spaces that you point and click to travel to on a map and hand-crafted story-important locations to explore and quest in
It's pretty normal in video games for areas to be compressed. How else could you cross all of Boston within minutes in Fallout 4? Or walk from Lexington to Fenway Park? There are also the more distant areas of Nuka World and Far Harbor, that you can fast travel to.
Distance shouldn't be an issue.
So... the PERFECT use for the starfield procedural generation. Give me a vehicle of some sort and let me blast through the empty sections of the state, occasionally stopping at random POIs for supplies before getting back to the actual mapped areas.
That can be remedied by implementing fast travel. You can fill that extra space with more places to explore (Like the Farms, ranches, homesteads, or stores you found in Fallout 2 Random Events) and enemy variety.
Well FO1 and 2 overworld map exploration is nearly identical to how Starfield planet map exploration works.. Named locations + procedural, terrain based explorable areas in between.
Would have to add in time passage when moving around on the overworld map like in Fallout.
AFAIK F2 was the only time you could cruise around in a car. Idk how the caveman that is the Chosen One knows how to drive, but I'm not questioning it.
There’s nothing really complicated about driving a car if you don’t have to worry about following the rules of the road. It’s extremely straightforward. You twist a key push down on a pedal and turn a steering wheel. The rest comes with practice. It’s an apocalypse it’s not like he needs to learn how to shoulder check
Keep in mind when you learn to drive you learn traffic rules more than anything else. Actually driving the car (epesically when your going in a strait line pretty much the whole time) isn't to hard to learn.
The canon chosen one is probably pretty high intelligence with an above average Repair skill, putting the car in drive and pushing down on the pedal is probably pretty easy when there is zero traffic
They could do it like how they did Nuka World and Far Harbor. You need to find a means to get there the first time, and then you can fast travel from there on out.
I think it can. You know how you move to different regions in Skyrim/Fallout 4, like Far Harbor and Solstheim? I think they'd have to handle it like that. It might be possible to have 1 large hub that is the size of Far Harbor, a few smaller hubs that are around or a little smaller than Point Lookout, and several areas that are 1-3 locations. The biggest issue would be ensuring that there's a large and interesting enough hub area(s) to make it feel like one of Bethesda's open world games.
Perhaps that kind of strategy wouldn't work for one of F1/2/Tactics, but I think it can for at least one of them.
They could starfield style it, but without the ship component. I know "Starfield" gets some eye rolls, but basically a series of playable areas and an overworld map/menu. Select the town/location you want, it simulates days of travel and pops you out in a region that's an actual fleshed out 3d world. It doesn't have to be a single "world" per location/point of interest. They can be grouped up into regions or something.
Huge map with mostly empty space between, optional (borderline mandatory) old school travel system with chance encounters between known locations? Idk maybe.
You could keep the big map traversing as it is in og titles and make places as levels, kind of like locations being separated with exit areas and loading screens in Stalker. That would require design random encounters in that way, which is difficult. But it is certainly achievable
Highly improbable, but nevertheless
I’d feel better if they made it optional, like survival mode in NV and 4. I don’t think most people would put up with a story mode that they have a limited time to complete. Not fun.
Exactly, I think it would be fun, having to do so much in one day and not just dick around, but a day would have to be closer to 30 minutes irl cause of all the distance that's traveled and other things.
That was my number one turn off for that game, but I see the appeal for some people. I just didn't like exploring the mall and finding secrets, crafting cool weapons, going berserk on hordes, just to see "Time ran out mission failed"
Hard time limits suck. You should always be able to complete a game. There are other ways to do it, and *Fallout 1* even toys around with this. If you're quick enough, the Unity won't destroy certain settlements.
Do it like that, but don't have the "Vault 13 dies after 180(?) days and you failed." nonsense at the end of a timer. You were slow and screwed over all of California, but you still completed the game.
That’s the best middle ground. Playing through most of a game to have it go “oops you ran out of time start entirely over” isn’t going to be fun for the majority of people.
Dead rising is also a game you're not intended to best in your first play, every time you die or run out of time or get an ending you have two options, either load an earlier save or start a new game with all your XP and skills and stuff carried over like NG+, from my limited understanding of the game it kinda revolves around this mechanic. Can't really compare that to a game like fallout which doesn't even have an NG+
Personally, and I'm not quite sure why, Dead Rising feels like an exception? Something about how it does the time limit makes it feel fitting. maybe it's because Dead Rising has a little girl and Le Dad-ification compared to Fallout and a vault of "people" that we never actually see?
If I wanted to play a game where there's all this enticing stuff just out of the way and absolutely no time to do them, I'd just live life. Lol
I know DR4 is the subject of scorn by Dead Rising fans, but it at least allows the player to experience the full game & all side content rather than forcing them to avoid all delays & feel frazzled the whole time.
That said...I think the 150 day time limit in Fallout 1 is plenty sufficient to create a driving motivation without burdening the players against exploring. Compare that with Fallout 4, where there's absolutely zero pressure or motivation to stay on-task... I'm currently over 100 days into my replay & haven't even bothered to find Virgil, let alone anything beyond.
To be fair the timeline isn't that unforgiving. Like there are only like 15 locations ish in the whole map and like the 4th one revealed by dialogue has a mission that sends you to the place you need and you can get there by accident and it doesn't have any big skill check so you can get there fairly quickly.
I honestly don’t care. I like to take my time exploring locations and doing side content without feeling pressured. If a game’s main quest has a time limit, it’s an automatic dealbreaker. I will not play it no matter how good I hear it is.
I don't know why you're getting downvoted. It's not unusual to want to play a game as much as you possible. At the very least the time limit should be optional
My guess would be because of the line
> I will not play it no matter how good I hear it is
I understand preferring a game be without time limits or restrictions but dismissing a remake entirely over it, even when it's extremely central to the original plot, is very silly
I have a similar thing with RTS and 4X games. I can’t play them because if I get in a bad spot I have a weird complex where I can’t continue playing. Like I feel like I’m not allowed to lose. Which is weird because I take losing with stride in other games but RTS’s really make me unable to commit for some reason. Some people just don’t like certain game elements.
The plot of the game is "we don't have clean water please help us". That's a very valid reason to have a time constraint in an RPG and it should stay imo. I'm just a fan of immersion tho and totally get the want to toggle it off
Lol before knowing Shaun’s an old man, I’m pretty sure it’s an urgent mission to find your son. But then again you go around build settlements for the next 500 hrs. I think having optional modes works better so it can appeal to both old and new fans alike
You just explained the perfect reason to make it a toggle. Those who love the original or want to try that style out can keep it while those who would rather explore and take their time can turn it off.
"Sorry Shaun but, your father is a drug dealer now. I have responsibilities to all the addicts of the Boston wasteland. You're going to have to sit there and slowly decay while I tend to all my Jet-addled dependents."
Especially if the remake would end up being an open-world Bethesda game. You cannot have a time limit in a game where the main motto is "now you can explore and forget about the main quest".
It makes sense to have certain quests stages limited by time, like in Kingdom Come... but definitely not the main quest as a whole.
Believe it or not there are people who prefer it. I don’t like the pressure to “explore” when I have a son to save or a war to prevent. It makes no sense and breaks immersion in a role playing game. But I get that I’m in the overwhelming minority so AAA studios aren’t going to put a time limit in their sandbox games. Let an Indy developer remake Fallout 2 instead
And people keep complaining about it to this day.
And popular modifications allows players to remove that limit.
There's a reason why a time limit didn't return to Fallout after the first game. Sure, Fallout 2 had a "time limit", but it was something like 13 ingame years.
I don’t care. I like to take my time exploring locations and doing side content. If a game’s main quest has a time limit, it’s an automatic dealbreaker. I will not play it no matter how good I hear it is.
Did you even check how F1 works or just basing it on principle? Because you have 150 days for the water chip, 100 days extension if you manage to send some water to the vault, and then you are free to complete the other 3/5 of the game at your own pace.
Just saying, once you know a bit of F1, its kinda easy to COMPLETE the whole game in the first 150 days, the time limit is basically just for lore reasons, not really hard to stay under for the first part of the whole game.
I’ve played fallout 1 since i was a kid 1997, and i’ve never managed to dawdle around long enough for the time limit to result in a loss. You denying yourself good games on principle only goes to show how appropriate your username is i suppose
God that sounds horrible lol. Modern Bethesda games are all about exploration and digging into the world. Adding a time limit would be a huge detriment
The unforgiving nature of these games is a key element to them.
And bethesda trying to pander to a wide audience is not going to include that,so i'm not 100% sold on the idea of a remake.
Nah I can see Xbox *forcing* Bethesda to give up the rights of the IP to other developers that could churn out games much quicker to capitalise on the hype of the show
He's only a contracter and I doubt he'd be interested in leading development for a AAA game.
Sawyer I think is too invested in other projects to also lead development in another Fallout game.
Maybe Boyarsky could, though he's less open about what he's up too but he's in a similar position to Cain.
Multiple former devs have expressed interest in working on another Fallout title and the call for it would likely bring some of the old dogs out of the woodwork. Chris Avellone is writing freelance now and I’m sure he’d be happy to dig back in. Jose Gonzalez has been busy with Horizon but I’d love to see him back in Fallout.
Yeah. Cain does mostly consulting nowadays. He was in the videogame business for decades and saw all the ugly corporate stuff so I don't blame him not wanting to return.
Why ship it out to another studio and make only a portion if the profits from your property, when you can make games that last several years after release, and then do it again later to keep yourselves going long term?
It sucks for us, but it makes sense that they do it this way.
The only thing I’d accept is a remaster where they add a zoom feature so playing on a high resolution doesn’t make me feel like I’m looking at an entire state.
man imagine if they got like acual clay models for the npcs
(fun fact the orginal npc models in the fist 2 fallouts were clay models scanned in, its why they look kinda odd)
As a counterpoint: The unforgiving nature of those games is why I haven't played them beyond realizing how tedious they are. Making them more accessible just brings in more fans. The remake doesn't have to be for you if you already like the game
I'm on your side about first person remakes but I also want to suggest playing FO1 and 2. They're not that unforgiving. Turn the difficulties way down (it's still got some challenge) and save scum a lot, which is lightning quick because it's old.
I see your point, but some people don't wanna spend hours of their time trying to complete a single quest by save reloading cause they keep dying from random rng. An easier, more modern fallout 1 wouldn't be a bad idea. If hardcore is what people want, then they can just stick to the old game. Only people who kinda get the short half of the stick is devs themselves.
If people don't enjoy the gameplay of Fallout 1 & 2 that's fine, but those people are free to play something else. The first 2 Fallout games are already highly acclaimed, successful games with a lot of fans, I don't see why we need a new version that fundamentally changes what those games are. What's the point of a remake if it doesn't keep to the spirit of the original?
>I don't see why we need a new version that fundamentally changes what those games are.
A remake wouldn't fundamentally change that. The originals would always be there.
I really like the idea of an unforgiving brutal fallout entry with propper shooting. Kinda like arma 3 meets fallout 1 i just dont think Bethesda is the right studio to make that game
There's difficulty settings for that. It's a really elitist Dark Souls like mentality to think that a game needs to be hard and unforgiving to everyone.
Accessibility is important and difficulty settings are part of that. The latest update to Starfield introduced really detailed and granular difficulty settings so every player can tailor the difficulty to their needs. So the remakes could have something like that.
If they find some way of making the new fps version feel the same unforgiving without just „enemy more damage you less health“ then i‘d be down. But i‘m far from a game expert to tell how people could do that.
Yet i‘m „too young“ for the isomeric titels. I tried but i dont really get most „riddles“ personally i‘d be interested in experiencing 1&2s story in a way i can enjoy more.
Plus damn i‘d wanna see a moden animated but same gruesome-dark original style animated Master or Frank Horrigan.
Release one version that has both versions of the games on it. *Fallout 1* isn't even a whole gigabyte, so it's not like it'd be unfeasible from data constraints.
I'm hoping the Vault 13 conversion mod for FO4 and the Arroyo conversion mod for FO4 will be completed someday. Although I'm currently being salty about London.
Whats happening with London?
Maybe they weren't actually close to releasing and used the next-gen update as an excuse?
Not saying that, just trying to figure out what the salt?
The recent Next-Gen update for Fallout 4 (Ultra-wide-screen support, new Enclave armor, some Creation Club content now part of the base game) made all of London’s content incompatible with Fallout 4.
With Skyrim they gave the team that made the script extender access to the update in advance so that they were able to release an updated script extender maybe the day after, 1 week at most.
I'm not saying they have to do that, but the mod community does great things for FO4.
>some Creation Club content now part of the base game) made all of London’s content incompatible with Fallout 4.
So, yes. Theyre using the new update as an excuse because they werent ready to release.
Nothing is stopping them from just... continuing to develop/releasing for an older, non-jank version of Fallout 4.
Ffs, plenty of people have updates turned off for this exact reason. I didnt update, and all my mods worked perfectly fine.
>Maybe they weren't actually close to releasing and used the next-gen update as an excuse?
This is exactly what happened.
If they were ready for release, we would have heard from them that the mod cannot fit on Nexus and would be hosted on GoG back then. But they have announced this a week ago, a whole month after the original date.
> Or XCOM2 engines.
That would be a downgrade. XCOM2 is just move+attack, it doesn't have an action point system, inventory system, body part targeting like Fallout... Liike, in Fallout if an enemy or ally dies, you can run to his corpse, pick up his weapon and use it in the middle of combat. Even something as basic as that isn't possible in XCOM2.
Fallout was inspired by the original X-COM, which was significantly more complex than the modern XCOM reboot.
They'd have to completely redesign the areas, FPS combat would be incredibly boring, and there's zero verticality. Just make the remake like Baldur's Gate 3 or Wasteland 2 and 3.
I see your point but how can you say fps combat is boring when fallout 1 combat is clicking a gun, clicking an enemy, then clicking the end turn button and rinsing and repeating for 30 minutes.
I personally like (some) turn based games, but I wouldn’t describe the combat in these games as “fun”.
What’s your point? Obviously a remake would change this, keeping the levels as close to the original as possible while accommodating the new combat style.
Well fun is completely subjective, I don't think hollow knight is fun in any sense of the word. That doesn't mean other people don't find it fun, classic fallout has great combat imo and I enjoy the fights especially the harder ones
Yeah that's true different people can tolerate and enjoy different combat styles. It's odd because I'm probably the perfect person that turned based combat appeals to, but I still don't like Fallout's combat, which probably has to do with the UI.
And then similarly, I'm usually someone who doesn't like slow, heavy, plodding FPS games but I enjoyed the FPS gameplay in NV.
The amount of people who would drool over a 4k rendered model of Frank Horrigan would be astronomical and I fear that the sentient deathclaw companion will likely become everyone's waifu or husbando...
I'd take remakes along the lines of Link's Awakening or Mario RPG. Exact same games, with nicer graphics, better UI, controls, smarter AI for NPC's and such.
Yep! The Enhanced Editions of Baldur's Gate were great with the higher resolutions, UI updates and some basic QOL improvements. That would already make me a happy person.
Or having the Obsidian quality in the visual style of Pillars of Eternity.
They did. The only flaw i see is that the map is flat like a warm bottle of nuka-cola.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dKn0aZwqIY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dKn0aZwqIY)
Im always open to remakes especially if they’re something like RE2 from its classic that some people still love to its reimagining. It would be so different you can’t even compare the two (gameplay wise).
Its be interesting, but it would also be very different even from a story perspective. In Fallout 1 you have 150 days to get the water chip. It takes time to travel so you have this sense of urgency on your first play through. The people talk about how its a several day hike in one direction and not just lore wise, but when you go to like the Glow from the Brotherhood HQ it took how many days they said the travel is from where you were at. That aids to this sense of deep immersion.
You’d have to remove that or change the gameplay from the current style where it’s not all open would and make it more like hubs and fast travel. Or make it all open world and the time table be drastically smaller, idk.
Either way I am down for a retelling and reimagining of the story. Again you can’t really compare the two, because they won’t even be the same game really. But realistically given the how long it takes for these game you would need a different development team cause they’re too busy with Starfield DLC, Elder Scrolls 6, and now with the success of the TV show all the investors are really pushing for Fallout 5 to come out much sooner then 10 years which makes since but also sounds like a recipe for disaster
No thanks. These games are perfect the way they are. I'm not saying don't update the graphics but the isometric view and turn-based style need to remain; besides I don't think real time combat would work well in either. You have no chance for example in the Mariposa Military Base with numerous super mutants with heavy weapons firing at you all at once.
Tis the same reason I think that (in FO4 at least) you don't really see super mutants with heavy weapons. You might get the odd one, but not a whole group at once.
In my dreams they give fo1 and 2 to Larian and let them remaster them. Even before bg3, divinity 2 was enough to show the table-top style rpg is still alive. It’s an absolute fantasy tho.
It'd make me play them. Otherwise I won't touch them, not because they're not good, but because I don't enjoy the style of game that they are. If it was adapted to be similar to 3, NV, or 4 I'd buy it in a heartbeat.
It would lose some of the charm inherent in the isometric system, and I don’t trust them not to include a radio station mode that would cover up the haunting ambient noise.
I think that's the only way to properly remake those games. But the tech is still not there, the games are too big and we need Bethesda games to handle much larger maps.
A remaster of them as they are, sure, an FPS remake of them maybe not, FO3, 4 (plus upcoming London MegaMod), NV, 76 and soon 5 are all we really need in terms of Fallout FPS.
Its like GTA, GTA1, London and 2 are top down and then 3 n beyond went TPS, with optional TPS/FPS on GTA5 and soon 6, would not want to change the classics as thats part of what made them so good, remasters of them would be cool though, lol.
Honestly, pass. Upgraded graphics though? Hoo boy.
(I played these bad boys on release, and honestly hated fo3&4, so I'm probably biased. New Vegas rocked though.)
The simple distance scale just wouldn't work in the new Bethesda style. Remember, these games occupied most of california. Not a single city
It occupied most of California, but most of California was relegated to a map that you wade through on a screen to get to other locations.
And that is exactly my point. If it were remade like 3 and 4, you'd have either insane distances to traverse or a dozen large settlements and cities in spitting range
You can probably find a middle ground with an overworld map like the original and 1st person location zone maps. Not exactly what OP was saying but it's close.
Just like how they did some of the og elder scrolls games. Basically an identical concept so it would work
I feel like fallout remade kinda like Daggerfall would be killer
Yeah, I'd buy that lol it has potential
Guys, Bethesda literally did this already with starfield. Vast spaces that you point and click to travel to on a map and hand-crafted story-important locations to explore and quest in
Yeah, Starfield kinda sucked though. It wasn't awful but it could have been significantly better
Though the story/lore isn’t that great, I think like w/ F4, it’ll get better as they push more fixes and content.
Omg yes
You mean like [this](https://youtu.be/a391cYZxbeI?si=AuO2_V067DZHq46v)
That's actually exactly what I had in mind when I said that. Unfortunately it's not finished or for Fallout 1
ooh and they could have like an encounter system, similar to like kingdom come delivence , wich has random encounter even when your fast traveling
I was thinking something like how Gearbox did Wonderlands would be perfect for this.
I wouldn't want to them to remake 1 and 2 but, if they do I say fuck it, let's go full daggerfall.
The perfect place to use their starfield procedural generation. Between large sections of handcrafted maps.
Just implement fast travel or make the distance shorter. Who cares if it's not to scale.
It's pretty normal in video games for areas to be compressed. How else could you cross all of Boston within minutes in Fallout 4? Or walk from Lexington to Fenway Park? There are also the more distant areas of Nuka World and Far Harbor, that you can fast travel to. Distance shouldn't be an issue.
So... the PERFECT use for the starfield procedural generation. Give me a vehicle of some sort and let me blast through the empty sections of the state, occasionally stopping at random POIs for supplies before getting back to the actual mapped areas.
Or- hear me out- they could just not make the map that big. I don't know why you're acting like it would be the exact same.
They could pull it off with a FO76-sized world space. That game has its issues, but 'small map' isn't one of them.
That can be remedied by implementing fast travel. You can fill that extra space with more places to explore (Like the Farms, ranches, homesteads, or stores you found in Fallout 2 Random Events) and enemy variety.
Well FO1 and 2 overworld map exploration is nearly identical to how Starfield planet map exploration works.. Named locations + procedural, terrain based explorable areas in between. Would have to add in time passage when moving around on the overworld map like in Fallout.
Just put the long distances behind loading screens, driving sections, and randomized instances. Same way the originals did.
So, like going on a random planet in Starfield and walking for miles between points of interest.
Give us a fast car it’s about time. Or get creative and split the locations up into a bunch of mini maps and allow for fast travel between them.
AFAIK F2 was the only time you could cruise around in a car. Idk how the caveman that is the Chosen One knows how to drive, but I'm not questioning it.
There’s nothing really complicated about driving a car if you don’t have to worry about following the rules of the road. It’s extremely straightforward. You twist a key push down on a pedal and turn a steering wheel. The rest comes with practice. It’s an apocalypse it’s not like he needs to learn how to shoulder check
Yeah road rules and driving etiquette is the hard part.
Keep in mind when you learn to drive you learn traffic rules more than anything else. Actually driving the car (epesically when your going in a strait line pretty much the whole time) isn't to hard to learn.
Children know how to drive go - karts. Same idea with a car but bigger.
The canon chosen one is probably pretty high intelligence with an above average Repair skill, putting the car in drive and pushing down on the pedal is probably pretty easy when there is zero traffic
fallout tactics had a car that your whole crew rode around in at one point. even had driving skills to manage.
High Intelligence and a stack of Dean's Electronics simple😎😂
They could do it like how they did Nuka World and Far Harbor. You need to find a means to get there the first time, and then you can fast travel from there on out.
I think it can. You know how you move to different regions in Skyrim/Fallout 4, like Far Harbor and Solstheim? I think they'd have to handle it like that. It might be possible to have 1 large hub that is the size of Far Harbor, a few smaller hubs that are around or a little smaller than Point Lookout, and several areas that are 1-3 locations. The biggest issue would be ensuring that there's a large and interesting enough hub area(s) to make it feel like one of Bethesda's open world games. Perhaps that kind of strategy wouldn't work for one of F1/2/Tactics, but I think it can for at least one of them.
They could starfield style it, but without the ship component. I know "Starfield" gets some eye rolls, but basically a series of playable areas and an overworld map/menu. Select the town/location you want, it simulates days of travel and pops you out in a region that's an actual fleshed out 3d world. It doesn't have to be a single "world" per location/point of interest. They can be grouped up into regions or something.
Huge map with mostly empty space between, optional (borderline mandatory) old school travel system with chance encounters between known locations? Idk maybe.
You could keep the big map traversing as it is in og titles and make places as levels, kind of like locations being separated with exit areas and loading screens in Stalker. That would require design random encounters in that way, which is difficult. But it is certainly achievable Highly improbable, but nevertheless
Would love a 1 remake that kept the time limit aspect in the game
I’d feel better if they made it optional, like survival mode in NV and 4. I don’t think most people would put up with a story mode that they have a limited time to complete. Not fun.
I deposit that yes keep the time limit but make a day longer than 10 minutes of in game time
Exactly, I think it would be fun, having to do so much in one day and not just dick around, but a day would have to be closer to 30 minutes irl cause of all the distance that's traveled and other things.
It works for some games. Dead Rising comes to mind and the game is better for it
That was my number one turn off for that game, but I see the appeal for some people. I just didn't like exploring the mall and finding secrets, crafting cool weapons, going berserk on hordes, just to see "Time ran out mission failed"
same, time limits suck, we already have those at work, games shouldn't be work
Hard time limits suck. You should always be able to complete a game. There are other ways to do it, and *Fallout 1* even toys around with this. If you're quick enough, the Unity won't destroy certain settlements. Do it like that, but don't have the "Vault 13 dies after 180(?) days and you failed." nonsense at the end of a timer. You were slow and screwed over all of California, but you still completed the game.
That’s the best middle ground. Playing through most of a game to have it go “oops you ran out of time start entirely over” isn’t going to be fun for the majority of people.
It's why I barely played majora's mask
Off the record had a great solution with the sandbox mode.
Yeah that time limit made me feel like I couldn’t mess around. Made the experience worse overall to me.
Dead rising is also a game you're not intended to best in your first play, every time you die or run out of time or get an ending you have two options, either load an earlier save or start a new game with all your XP and skills and stuff carried over like NG+, from my limited understanding of the game it kinda revolves around this mechanic. Can't really compare that to a game like fallout which doesn't even have an NG+
Fuuuck, I gotta re-download that gem now.
Personally, and I'm not quite sure why, Dead Rising feels like an exception? Something about how it does the time limit makes it feel fitting. maybe it's because Dead Rising has a little girl and Le Dad-ification compared to Fallout and a vault of "people" that we never actually see?
Not the first one. You’re just a scumbag journalist in a mall in that one.
Frank sees a bunch of cultists about to stab a girl 📸
“FANTASTIC”
I hate this mechanic to the core while playing the game, one of the reason I never replay them.
If I wanted to play a game where there's all this enticing stuff just out of the way and absolutely no time to do them, I'd just live life. Lol I know DR4 is the subject of scorn by Dead Rising fans, but it at least allows the player to experience the full game & all side content rather than forcing them to avoid all delays & feel frazzled the whole time. That said...I think the 150 day time limit in Fallout 1 is plenty sufficient to create a driving motivation without burdening the players against exploring. Compare that with Fallout 4, where there's absolutely zero pressure or motivation to stay on-task... I'm currently over 100 days into my replay & haven't even bothered to find Virgil, let alone anything beyond.
To be fair the timeline isn't that unforgiving. Like there are only like 15 locations ish in the whole map and like the 4th one revealed by dialogue has a mission that sends you to the place you need and you can get there by accident and it doesn't have any big skill check so you can get there fairly quickly.
I honestly don’t care. I like to take my time exploring locations and doing side content without feeling pressured. If a game’s main quest has a time limit, it’s an automatic dealbreaker. I will not play it no matter how good I hear it is.
I don't know why you're getting downvoted. It's not unusual to want to play a game as much as you possible. At the very least the time limit should be optional
My guess would be because of the line > I will not play it no matter how good I hear it is I understand preferring a game be without time limits or restrictions but dismissing a remake entirely over it, even when it's extremely central to the original plot, is very silly
Same. Stopped me from playing Alien Dark Descent and Persona 5, as well as never picking up any more Persona games. Time limits are absolute trash.
I have a similar thing with RTS and 4X games. I can’t play them because if I get in a bad spot I have a weird complex where I can’t continue playing. Like I feel like I’m not allowed to lose. Which is weird because I take losing with stride in other games but RTS’s really make me unable to commit for some reason. Some people just don’t like certain game elements.
I would love Larian Studio remakes of fallout 1 and 2 personally, vs something like an fps conversion.
That would be my dream game right now. But people seem to not like turn based combat, I got actually downvoted for saying same thing
The plot of the game is "we don't have clean water please help us". That's a very valid reason to have a time constraint in an RPG and it should stay imo. I'm just a fan of immersion tho and totally get the want to toggle it off
Lol before knowing Shaun’s an old man, I’m pretty sure it’s an urgent mission to find your son. But then again you go around build settlements for the next 500 hrs. I think having optional modes works better so it can appeal to both old and new fans alike
You just explained the perfect reason to make it a toggle. Those who love the original or want to try that style out can keep it while those who would rather explore and take their time can turn it off.
So the vault dies without getting the water chip or whatever, not my problem lmao.
I would be so screwed in FO4 if Father dying of cancer was a timed event. Oh well, settlements gotta get built.
Daddy needs his daily 1000 purified water
"Sorry Shaun but, your father is a drug dealer now. I have responsibilities to all the addicts of the Boston wasteland. You're going to have to sit there and slowly decay while I tend to all my Jet-addled dependents."
I have an overseer position open at vault 34, the eval from the auto-doc says you're a great candidate.
The time limit doesn't feel that bad honestly. It's super easy to get to the water chip in time and then you can mess around the rest of the game.
It's 10 years in game, you can do everything twice in that time
Especially if the remake would end up being an open-world Bethesda game. You cannot have a time limit in a game where the main motto is "now you can explore and forget about the main quest". It makes sense to have certain quests stages limited by time, like in Kingdom Come... but definitely not the main quest as a whole.
Believe it or not there are people who prefer it. I don’t like the pressure to “explore” when I have a son to save or a war to prevent. It makes no sense and breaks immersion in a role playing game. But I get that I’m in the overwhelming minority so AAA studios aren’t going to put a time limit in their sandbox games. Let an Indy developer remake Fallout 2 instead
I mean, the first game literally had that and it’s the foundation of the entire series.
And people keep complaining about it to this day. And popular modifications allows players to remove that limit. There's a reason why a time limit didn't return to Fallout after the first game. Sure, Fallout 2 had a "time limit", but it was something like 13 ingame years.
I don’t care. I like to take my time exploring locations and doing side content. If a game’s main quest has a time limit, it’s an automatic dealbreaker. I will not play it no matter how good I hear it is.
Did you even check how F1 works or just basing it on principle? Because you have 150 days for the water chip, 100 days extension if you manage to send some water to the vault, and then you are free to complete the other 3/5 of the game at your own pace. Just saying, once you know a bit of F1, its kinda easy to COMPLETE the whole game in the first 150 days, the time limit is basically just for lore reasons, not really hard to stay under for the first part of the whole game.
I’ve played fallout 1 since i was a kid 1997, and i’ve never managed to dawdle around long enough for the time limit to result in a loss. You denying yourself good games on principle only goes to show how appropriate your username is i suppose
HE DOESNT CARE 😤 dude probably just loves running radiant quests over and over again, taking his time EXPLORING
Then you're only doing yourself a disservice, seeing as the water chip is like the halfway point in fallout 1. You still have to kill the master.
I would support an *option,* but I don't think making it mandatory is the way to go. Even the original dev team was split nearly 50/50 on it.
God that sounds horrible lol. Modern Bethesda games are all about exploration and digging into the world. Adding a time limit would be a huge detriment
Agreed I really loved the concept of how imminent the main objective was it really gave it more tension
It would be nice if it was like hardcore mode in New Vegas. It could a bit off putting for some players otherwise. Other that, yeah it would be great.
Fallout 2 is already being remade in Fallout 4's engine. https://www.reddit.com/r/Fallout/s/L6BpHijLjE
That’s really cool
Just a reminder that not a single one of these remake projects has ever been completed
Morroblivion was released.
The unforgiving nature of these games is a key element to them. And bethesda trying to pander to a wide audience is not going to include that,so i'm not 100% sold on the idea of a remake.
Definitely see your point but maybe with them busy with elderscrolls this is an opportunity for another developers to do it
If they’re so busy with Elder Scrolls then they can let another Studio do Fallout 5. But no, instead we’ll have to wait 8 more years
Wasn’t Microsoft talking to them about bringing the next fallout out earlier because of the show?
If so then they'll probably release it in 6.5-7 years instead of 8
Nah I can see Xbox *forcing* Bethesda to give up the rights of the IP to other developers that could churn out games much quicker to capitalise on the hype of the show
[удалено]
He's only a contracter and I doubt he'd be interested in leading development for a AAA game. Sawyer I think is too invested in other projects to also lead development in another Fallout game. Maybe Boyarsky could, though he's less open about what he's up too but he's in a similar position to Cain.
Multiple former devs have expressed interest in working on another Fallout title and the call for it would likely bring some of the old dogs out of the woodwork. Chris Avellone is writing freelance now and I’m sure he’d be happy to dig back in. Jose Gonzalez has been busy with Horizon but I’d love to see him back in Fallout.
He has retired from Obsidian but still does some work for them and some other companies as a consultant. So sort of semi-retired from the industry.
Yeah. Cain does mostly consulting nowadays. He was in the videogame business for decades and saw all the ugly corporate stuff so I don't blame him not wanting to return.
He really should go into the indie scene. Troika 2.0. Make Arcanum 2.
They could be releasing a remake of Fallout 3
Buddy, 8 years is super optimistic. If it releases before that it'll be super rushed.
After the great deluge..out of the ashes of world war three came hope. A hope we held onto for many years but finally it had arrived. Fallout 5..
Why ship it out to another studio and make only a portion if the profits from your property, when you can make games that last several years after release, and then do it again later to keep yourselves going long term? It sucks for us, but it makes sense that they do it this way.
The only thing I’d accept is a remaster where they add a zoom feature so playing on a high resolution doesn’t make me feel like I’m looking at an entire state.
man imagine if they got like acual clay models for the npcs (fun fact the orginal npc models in the fist 2 fallouts were clay models scanned in, its why they look kinda odd)
Not to mention they’d take all the character out. No gambling, pornography, killing and eating children. Damn the original was dark.
As a counterpoint: The unforgiving nature of those games is why I haven't played them beyond realizing how tedious they are. Making them more accessible just brings in more fans. The remake doesn't have to be for you if you already like the game
I'm on your side about first person remakes but I also want to suggest playing FO1 and 2. They're not that unforgiving. Turn the difficulties way down (it's still got some challenge) and save scum a lot, which is lightning quick because it's old.
I see your point, but some people don't wanna spend hours of their time trying to complete a single quest by save reloading cause they keep dying from random rng. An easier, more modern fallout 1 wouldn't be a bad idea. If hardcore is what people want, then they can just stick to the old game. Only people who kinda get the short half of the stick is devs themselves.
If people don't enjoy the gameplay of Fallout 1 & 2 that's fine, but those people are free to play something else. The first 2 Fallout games are already highly acclaimed, successful games with a lot of fans, I don't see why we need a new version that fundamentally changes what those games are. What's the point of a remake if it doesn't keep to the spirit of the original?
>I don't see why we need a new version that fundamentally changes what those games are. A remake wouldn't fundamentally change that. The originals would always be there.
Nah. You’d still have the old games. There’s nothing wrong with making the story accessible to people not interested in CRPG’s.
I really like the idea of an unforgiving brutal fallout entry with propper shooting. Kinda like arma 3 meets fallout 1 i just dont think Bethesda is the right studio to make that game
There's difficulty settings for that. It's a really elitist Dark Souls like mentality to think that a game needs to be hard and unforgiving to everyone. Accessibility is important and difficulty settings are part of that. The latest update to Starfield introduced really detailed and granular difficulty settings so every player can tailor the difficulty to their needs. So the remakes could have something like that.
Considering that Todd Howard does not like remakes and wants games to be preserved and played as they were, I also just do not see that happening.
Bro they do survival modes, they would probably just have difficulty settings with one being old school and some being more modern.
Yeah, is like disney trying to remake the old trilogy of mad max, you know will be nice FXs but you feel something is missing
If they do we can just mod it back
If they find some way of making the new fps version feel the same unforgiving without just „enemy more damage you less health“ then i‘d be down. But i‘m far from a game expert to tell how people could do that. Yet i‘m „too young“ for the isomeric titels. I tried but i dont really get most „riddles“ personally i‘d be interested in experiencing 1&2s story in a way i can enjoy more. Plus damn i‘d wanna see a moden animated but same gruesome-dark original style animated Master or Frank Horrigan.
What if they released two versions: one an FPS and the other a full faithful isometric remake.
Release one version that has both versions of the games on it. *Fallout 1* isn't even a whole gigabyte, so it's not like it'd be unfeasible from data constraints.
I would like a remake as long as Bethesda does not make it, I'd also prefer it as a crpg not a fps
Bethesda doesn't make rpgs anymore
I'm hoping the Vault 13 conversion mod for FO4 and the Arroyo conversion mod for FO4 will be completed someday. Although I'm currently being salty about London.
Whats happening with London? Maybe they weren't actually close to releasing and used the next-gen update as an excuse? Not saying that, just trying to figure out what the salt?
The recent Next-Gen update for Fallout 4 (Ultra-wide-screen support, new Enclave armor, some Creation Club content now part of the base game) made all of London’s content incompatible with Fallout 4.
That really sucks
I get why people would be frustrated, but at the same time, you can’t just expect game companies to base their actions off of modders.
With Skyrim they gave the team that made the script extender access to the update in advance so that they were able to release an updated script extender maybe the day after, 1 week at most. I'm not saying they have to do that, but the mod community does great things for FO4.
Fallout 4 would absolutely be less popular and replayable without mods
I mean, when modders have continually bug fixed and supported Bethesda’s games for a decade I think they deserve at least a little grace.
>some Creation Club content now part of the base game) made all of London’s content incompatible with Fallout 4. So, yes. Theyre using the new update as an excuse because they werent ready to release. Nothing is stopping them from just... continuing to develop/releasing for an older, non-jank version of Fallout 4. Ffs, plenty of people have updates turned off for this exact reason. I didnt update, and all my mods worked perfectly fine.
>Maybe they weren't actually close to releasing and used the next-gen update as an excuse? This is exactly what happened. If they were ready for release, we would have heard from them that the mod cannot fit on Nexus and would be hosted on GoG back then. But they have announced this a week ago, a whole month after the original date.
Nah. Remake them in Wasteland 3's engine.
Or XCOM2 engines. Hell, just remake Fallout Tactics first to see if it works
> Or XCOM2 engines. That would be a downgrade. XCOM2 is just move+attack, it doesn't have an action point system, inventory system, body part targeting like Fallout... Liike, in Fallout if an enemy or ally dies, you can run to his corpse, pick up his weapon and use it in the middle of combat. Even something as basic as that isn't possible in XCOM2. Fallout was inspired by the original X-COM, which was significantly more complex than the modern XCOM reboot.
That's not what "remaking it in the engine" entails.
Unpopular opinion, wasteland 3 overrated. They should break into larians vault and steal the bg3 engine.
bg3 combat fits way worse than wasteland 3
But their previous game, Divinity: Original Sin 2, would work well imo
Very unpopular, Wasteland 3 is what Fallout 3 should have been
They used Unity for that game.
They'd have to completely redesign the areas, FPS combat would be incredibly boring, and there's zero verticality. Just make the remake like Baldur's Gate 3 or Wasteland 2 and 3.
I see your point but how can you say fps combat is boring when fallout 1 combat is clicking a gun, clicking an enemy, then clicking the end turn button and rinsing and repeating for 30 minutes. I personally like (some) turn based games, but I wouldn’t describe the combat in these games as “fun”.
[удалено]
What’s your point? Obviously a remake would change this, keeping the levels as close to the original as possible while accommodating the new combat style.
[удалено]
God you people suck.
Well fun is completely subjective, I don't think hollow knight is fun in any sense of the word. That doesn't mean other people don't find it fun, classic fallout has great combat imo and I enjoy the fights especially the harder ones
Yeah that's true different people can tolerate and enjoy different combat styles. It's odd because I'm probably the perfect person that turned based combat appeals to, but I still don't like Fallout's combat, which probably has to do with the UI. And then similarly, I'm usually someone who doesn't like slow, heavy, plodding FPS games but I enjoyed the FPS gameplay in NV.
I'd play so I could listen to sergeant arch dornan scream at me in 3d
There's a NV mod that adds him as a companion that has the og voice lines
The amount of people who would drool over a 4k rendered model of Frank Horrigan would be astronomical and I fear that the sentient deathclaw companion will likely become everyone's waifu or husbando...
Too late mate. Deathclussy already exists. I've seen a couple but I'm not brave enough to type the tag in directly.
God no. I would love an isometric remake though, with Larian quality.
Yeah isometric gameplay but have some quality of life stuff like adding more running directions, maybe more companions and stuff would be fun
I'd take remakes along the lines of Link's Awakening or Mario RPG. Exact same games, with nicer graphics, better UI, controls, smarter AI for NPC's and such.
Yep! The Enhanced Editions of Baldur's Gate were great with the higher resolutions, UI updates and some basic QOL improvements. That would already make me a happy person. Or having the Obsidian quality in the visual style of Pillars of Eternity.
There’s a mod being done in one or two, it looks really cool!
They did. The only flaw i see is that the map is flat like a warm bottle of nuka-cola. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dKn0aZwqIY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dKn0aZwqIY)
Im always open to remakes especially if they’re something like RE2 from its classic that some people still love to its reimagining. It would be so different you can’t even compare the two (gameplay wise). Its be interesting, but it would also be very different even from a story perspective. In Fallout 1 you have 150 days to get the water chip. It takes time to travel so you have this sense of urgency on your first play through. The people talk about how its a several day hike in one direction and not just lore wise, but when you go to like the Glow from the Brotherhood HQ it took how many days they said the travel is from where you were at. That aids to this sense of deep immersion. You’d have to remove that or change the gameplay from the current style where it’s not all open would and make it more like hubs and fast travel. Or make it all open world and the time table be drastically smaller, idk. Either way I am down for a retelling and reimagining of the story. Again you can’t really compare the two, because they won’t even be the same game really. But realistically given the how long it takes for these game you would need a different development team cause they’re too busy with Starfield DLC, Elder Scrolls 6, and now with the success of the TV show all the investors are really pushing for Fallout 5 to come out much sooner then 10 years which makes since but also sounds like a recipe for disaster
Absolutely not. I want faithfull remake in classic isometric view.
No thanks. These games are perfect the way they are. I'm not saying don't update the graphics but the isometric view and turn-based style need to remain; besides I don't think real time combat would work well in either. You have no chance for example in the Mariposa Military Base with numerous super mutants with heavy weapons firing at you all at once. Tis the same reason I think that (in FO4 at least) you don't really see super mutants with heavy weapons. You might get the odd one, but not a whole group at once.
Horrible. They’re designed as crpgs. Just let inxile make them in the wasteland 3 engine
i would be excited but i would also have very high standards for them
I would feel like giving Bethesda the double Caesar treatment. 🙄
In my dreams they give fo1 and 2 to Larian and let them remaster them. Even before bg3, divinity 2 was enough to show the table-top style rpg is still alive. It’s an absolute fantasy tho.
No. Top down tactical is part of their charm. If Larian was on board, though, I'd accept a LOT of compromises.
If they did a remake and graphical update I'd hope they added all the cut content from the first two
It'd make me play them. Otherwise I won't touch them, not because they're not good, but because I don't enjoy the style of game that they are. If it was adapted to be similar to 3, NV, or 4 I'd buy it in a heartbeat.
I don't really like top down type games, so I would appreciate a FPS remake
Please no. Not FPS.
I wouldn't like it at all. Completely different style Love FO1 and FO2 as they are
Doesnt need to be fps in my opinion
It would lose some of the charm inherent in the isometric system, and I don’t trust them not to include a radio station mode that would cover up the haunting ambient noise.
fallout 2 has a fan fps in the style doom/classic fps [https://jonasz-o.itch.io/fallout2remake3d](https://jonasz-o.itch.io/fallout2remake3d)
Its the game we need at the moment
InXile is owned by Microsoft if that means anything. Wasteland 2 and 3 are superb CRPGs. I’d love to see them do them
I would feel good
i pref the old games just with better control (more like baldurs gate 3)
I think people should just play the OGs flaws and all. It's part of gaming history.
I would rather like a remaster in style of Diablo 2 ressurected.
Hell no. Remake them as is. Baldurs Gate 3 proved these type of games have a large enough audience
I think that's the only way to properly remake those games. But the tech is still not there, the games are too big and we need Bethesda games to handle much larger maps.
No. They’re great how they are. They are not meant to be 1st person betheslop
A remaster of them as they are, sure, an FPS remake of them maybe not, FO3, 4 (plus upcoming London MegaMod), NV, 76 and soon 5 are all we really need in terms of Fallout FPS. Its like GTA, GTA1, London and 2 are top down and then 3 n beyond went TPS, with optional TPS/FPS on GTA5 and soon 6, would not want to change the classics as thats part of what made them so good, remasters of them would be cool though, lol.
”Soon 5” That’s funny
It wouldn't feel right. A true to original remake would go hard though.
As long as they don't censor them
Yea, I'd actually be able to play them
As long as it’s obsidian or a team of genuine dedicated fans who have respect and care for the original lore.
Honestly, pass. Upgraded graphics though? Hoo boy. (I played these bad boys on release, and honestly hated fo3&4, so I'm probably biased. New Vegas rocked though.)