Could Bethesda outsource Fallout to Obsidian?

[Morgoth]

This should be technically possible, since Bethesda is also a publisher. Beth still could make a F4, while Obsidian could make a Fallout game more in the vein of F1/F2 style. Because now that the brand has been reinvigorated and is selling pretty well, chances are that more Fallout games will mean moah money for both Obsidian and Beth. Plus more happy customers.

[Magister Lajciak]

I guess it could do so in theory, but it would probably want to develop further Fallout games by itself, so unless Obsidian was willing to accept a very strict contract to the benefit of Bethesda, I don't see this happening.

[Morgoth]

I guess it could do so in theory, but it would probably want to develop further Fallout games by itself, so unless Obsidian was willing to accept a very strict contract to the benefit of Bethesda, I don't see this happening.

I'm not sure Beth would be that strict about that. I mean they're also a developer, so they're sitting on the same side of the table, right? It would be more a matter about relationship and trust I think, but I think if Obsidian is interested in it and Ferg presses Beth to make a deal, it could really happen.

Edited November 4, 2008 by Morgoth

[Hurlshort]

What do you mean more in the vein of F1/F2? Do you mean graphically inferior?

[Dagon]

It would be nice to get something isometric and turnbased from this relationship

[Morgoth]

It would be nice to get something isometric and turnbased from this relationship

Exactly. Something like...Van Buren?

[Hurlshort]

It would be nice to get something isometric and turnbased from this relationship

Exactly. Something like...Van Buren?

 

I don't know why you need Fallout to go isometric and turn-based. My favorite game ever is Jagged Alliance 2, an isometric turn-based game. The strength of that game lies in the tactical TB combat. I would love to see a rebirth of that genre and gameplay style.

 

However, Fallout 3 is a fantastic success. It has captured the setting perfectly and it has extended the Fallout series. It has modernized and revitalized an IP that was pretty much dead. They aren't going to go backwards from here and try to put Fallout back into an isometric game. Isometric TB games don't have the audience.

 

 

Does Betheda actually have the full Fallout IP? I know Interplay owns some sort of Fallout MMO IP. Does Bethesda need to license the IP again to make Fallout 4?

[Magister Lajciak]

I guess it could do so in theory, but it would probably want to develop further Fallout games by itself, so unless Obsidian was willing to accept a very strict contract to the benefit of Bethesda, I don't see this happening.

I'm not sure Beth would be that strict about that. I mean they're also a developer, so they're sitting on the same side of the table, right? It would be more a matter about relationship and trust I think, but I think if Obsidian is interested in it and Ferg presses Beth to make a deal, it could really happen.

 

I meant financially strict in favor of Bethesda. Fallout is a lucrative license, especially now that it has been reinvigorated by Fallout 3.

[Magister Lajciak]

Does Betheda actually have the full Fallout IP? I know Interplay owns some sort of Fallout MMO IP. Does Bethesda need to license the IP again to make Fallout 4?

 

Bethesda has the full IP. Interplay does have the right to make a Fallout MMO, but it's right is limited even in that regard. I don't recall the precise details, but it is something like, one game only, has to enter development by a certain date, Interplay has to raise a certain amount of money for it by a certain date and so on.

[Morgoth]

It would be nice to get something isometric and turnbased from this relationship

Exactly. Something like...Van Buren?

 

I don't know why you need Fallout to go isometric and turn-based. My favorite game ever is Jagged Alliance 2, an isometric turn-based game. The strength of that game lies in the tactical TB combat. I would love to see a rebirth of that genre and gameplay style.

So, you just answered my question. Because I love isometric turn-based games too? Oh, not to mention Fallout of course.

 

Beth still can make Fallout 4 a'la F3 style. Besides, didn't Ferg once stated they'll continue to have at least one PC hardcore RPG in development, even though this might mean they have to self-finance it? Sure they could do their own Post-apocalyptic RPG, won't stop them here. But Fallout has now been ressurected from the dead, so what could be better than another Fallout game that uses SPECIAL and is isometric and turnbased? Surely it will be directed towards "fans" first and foremost, but chances are it should sell reasonably well now that the fan base has been extended, courtesy to Beth.

[Magister Lajciak]

Although I like the isometric perspective too, Van Buren is definitely dead. It is old technology now and familiarity with it has been long lost - it would probably be easier to start from scratch than to complete it.

[Hurlshort]

Yes, I am a fan of turn based games, but what I'm saying here is I don't see the business sense in this. I understand Obsidian might be willing to take on the project, but Bethesda has absolutely no reason to comply.

 

Fallout 3 has found new success under the Bethesda format. I don't see them risking that success by allowing a hardcore niche product to come out with the Fallout name. Down the road, maybe the franchise will stagnate a bit and there won't be as much of a risk in outsourcing their major IP, but right now Beth will probably be playing this one close to their chest.

[Morgoth]

I guess Hurlshot is right. But someone still may dream.

 

@Lajciak

That's what I meant. Van Buren, gameplay wise, but with a newer engine.

[Maria Caliban]

Now that Fallout has been resurrected, let's hand it over to a third-party developer so they can introduce elements most fans are unlikely to enjoy. It's a model for success.

 

Also, Obsidian has never made a turn-based, isometric game. What makes you so sure they'd be interested in taking Fallout in that direction? Their last two games used engines developed by a different publisher. Why not use whatever engine Fallout 3 used?

[Morgoth]

Now that Fallout has been resurrected, let's hand it over to a third-party developer so they can introduce elements most fans are unlikely to enjoy. It's a model for success.

 

Also, Obsidian has never made a turn-based, isometric game. What makes you so sure they'd be interested in taking Fallout in that direction? Their last two games used engines developed by a different publisher. Why not use whatever engine Fallout 3 used?

If there are people who like turn-based games, there will also be interest in making these games. Or why does the Civilization series sell like hot cakes?

 

Besides, it didn't stop Obsidian to develop NWN2 plus two addons, a game that is clearly directed towards the hardcore fanbase, so why should Obsidian hesitate to make more isometric PC RPGs?

[Hurlshort]

I do think that the SPECIAL system could be licensed for some sort of non-Fallout program, and it would be awesome to see it used again in a TB isometric game. But to be honest, I'm dying for any squad based game like this. Sure Civ is still a hot property, but that's a very different game.

 

It's pretty bleak for a JA3 or a new Fallout: Tactics. But everything comes back in time. Adventure games found a way to revive themselves a bit recently, so maybe isometric TB games are next.

[Volourn]

The chances that Bestehda would let Obsidian (or any company)P use their IP is near nil. Obviously, the thing with Interplay is a special case 'cause of the circumstances of the sale.

 

And, FO3 sucks like the rest of Bethesda games most likely so Obsidian should stick with the good stuff like NWN. And, I don't really see Obsidian pursing a turn based game. they've mad eit clear that tb isn't their thing. Unelss that changes don't count on it.

Edited November 4, 2008 by Volourn

[Hurlshort]

The chances that Bestehda would let Obsidian (or any company)P use their IP is near nil. Obviously, the thing with Interplay is a special case 'cause of the circumstances of the sale.

 

And, FO3 sucks like the rest of Bethesda games most likely so Obsidian should stick with the good stuff like NWN. And, I don't really see Obsidian pursing a turn based game. they've mad eit clear that tb isn't their thing. Unelss that changes don't count on it.

 

I didn't realize you had Fallout 3? I'd love to hear your opinions of it.

[Killian Kalthorne]

I rather have Obsidian focus on its own IPs. Let Bethesda have Fallout, let Obsidian have Alpha Protocol.

[Llyranor]

Dear Obsidian,

 

Keep working on your own IPs.

 

Love,

Your CEO

[Morgoth]

Obsidian will keep doing both 3rd party and selfmade IPs.

[Volourn]

"I didn't realize you had Fallout 3? I'd love to hear your opinions of it."

 

I don't. But, I use common sense to choose what agmes I find worthy of my money. From solid long term research, I've determined that FO3 sucks like other Bethesda games and isn't worth full price.

[Dagon]

Anyone heard anything about Wasteland 2 by Inxile?

Last time I heard it was planned to be very much in vein of old Fallout games..

 

BTW. If i remember corectly Todd Howard said that they would love to make Turn Based Isometric Fallout for Nintendo DS that would be nice.

[random n00b]

From solid long term research, I've determined that...

Hahaha.

[Wrath of Dagon]

Adventure games found a way to revive themselves a bit recently, so maybe isometric TB games are next.

Isn't that what King's Bounty is supposed to be?