Fallout: New Vegas Interview

POOPERSCOOPER · Post by **POOPERSCOOPER** » Mon Apr 20, 2009 9:03 pm

[ Game -> Interview ] - News related to <a href="http://www.duckandcover.cx/archives.php ... ry=35">Top Story: Fallout: New Vegas Interview</a>

Hot from the oven about the announcement of a new Fallout game by Obsidian and there is an interview with Pete Hines;<blockquote>Shack: When did Bethesda start thinking about a Fallout spin-off?
Pete Hines: It's something that
we've discussed at night for a while, and just had talked about doing.
And we said, well, if we're going to do this, we
want to do it with the right kinds of folks, and the folks that could
do right by it, have the right kind of experience, the right
background. 
Honestly, we just felt like Obsidian was a great fit for that. They
have experience doing this kind of thing, they have guys that worked on
the original Fallout games. We really liked their idea for what it is
they wanted to do, and we just said, "Okay."
</blockquote> You can read the rest <a target="_self" href="http://www.shacknews.com/featuredarticl ... 1113">here. </a>I'll try my best to keep on this story :journalist:
<blockquote> </blockquote>Spotted @ <a href="http://www.shacknews.com">Shacknews</a>

Wolfman Walt · Post by **Wolfman Walt** » Mon Apr 20, 2009 9:05 pm

I'm curious as to what "Their idea" is. It makes it sound different from FO3, which excites me. The further the distance, the better.

Aonaran · Post by **Aonaran** » Mon Apr 20, 2009 9:22 pm

Not a true sequel to Fallout 3, New Vegas is instead a spin-off RPG in the same style under development at Obsidian Entertainment.

So Bethesda made the "true sequel" and Obsidian the "spin-off". I see, I see.

For teh lulz:

Pete Hines wrote:...we spent a lot of time developing Fallout into something that is very hot.

and

Shacknews wrote: When did Bethesda start thinking about a Fallout spin-off?

PiP · Post by **PiP** » Mon Apr 20, 2009 9:28 pm

Not a true sequel to Fallout 3, New Vegas is instead a spin-off RPG in the same style under development at Obsidian Entertainment.

is that chill or giggles down my spine?

Aonaran · Post by **Aonaran** » Mon Apr 20, 2009 9:29 pm

Cold giggles?

Post by **King of Creation** » Tue Apr 21, 2009 6:50 am

I want to know why it's a spin-off and not just another installment in the series. Is it going to be a true rpg and not a shooter?

Dicksmoker · Post by **Dicksmoker** » Tue Apr 21, 2009 7:59 am

My guess is that it will be a a short 15-hour game, linear, not open-world. Hence the "spin-off." Can't really expect much more if they only have a year to do it. But Mask of the Betrayer is proof that they can do good things under that criteria.

Post by **King of Creation** » Tue Apr 21, 2009 8:37 am

Well the Fallout 3 engine is in place, so they don't have to use all the time to create implement a new engine. I have high hopes that this will be loads better than Fallout 3.

Wolfman Walt · Post by **Wolfman Walt** » Tue Apr 21, 2009 9:32 am

Is it using the FO3 engine? It undoubtably is, but I haven't heard that being specifically confirmed.

S4ur0n27 · Post by **S4ur0n27** » Wed Apr 22, 2009 3:35 am

If they use the Fallout 3 engine they might make another fps then :/

jetbaby · Post by **jetbaby** » Wed Apr 22, 2009 8:44 am

I'm too lazy to read the article, but is there any information about what control Bethesda will maintain over Obsidian? Will it be Obsidian's game, funded by Bethesda? Or is it Bethesda's game made by Obsidian?

POOPERSCOOPER · Post by **POOPERSCOOPER** » Thu Apr 23, 2009 4:05 pm

I'm pretty sure it will be funded by Bethesda since they are a publisher. They haven't really said too much about what control they would have over it except that it will probably use the FO3 engine. I think they said something like they want Obsidian to have the freedom and stuff.

popscythe · Post by **popscythe** » Tue Apr 28, 2009 12:36 am

Pete Hines: That's more part of, we spent a lot of time developing Fallout into something that is very hot. It has a lot of people's interest--

Shack: So you're just protecting it.

Pete Hines: --and we just want to be make sure that we're protecting what we created.

This fucking outrage is what needs to be in the "preview" section of the article on the front page.

Please. For fucks sake had I not read what this absolute bastard I wouldn't be the genial motherfucker I am today.

jiujitsu · Post by **jiujitsu** » Tue Apr 28, 2009 5:24 pm

I hope it works out. It can't get worse can it?

Aonaran · Post by **Aonaran** » Tue Apr 28, 2009 5:36 pm

Optimism will not be tolerated.

Smiley · Post by **Smiley** » Tue Apr 28, 2009 5:49 pm

jiujitsu wrote:I hope it works out. It can't get worse can it?

Official Fail.

Thanks a lot man.

VasikkA · Post by **VasikkA** » Tue Apr 28, 2009 6:57 pm

jiujitsu wrote:I hope it works out. It can't get worse can it?

Don't underestimate the ingenuity of Bethsidian.

St. Toxic · Post by **St. Toxic** » Tue Apr 28, 2009 7:26 pm

Lesson 1: It can always get worse.

Psychoul · Post by **Psychoul** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 7:03 pm

dont jinx it please.

and i hope it turns out turn based combat at least, would be cool if it was isometric too.

jetbaby · Post by **jetbaby** » Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:52 am

St. Toxic wrote:Lesson 1: It can always get worse.

Didn't you all learn this with Brotherhood of Steel and its sequel?