New Fallout Game Teased

"To all my #Fallout3 and #ThreeDog fans: There may be more of the Dog coming! Fingers crossed!" https://twitter.com/ETDel...tus/288757510406557697 ETD is the voice of the capital wasteland, so I'm not sure if this means another Fallout game in the capital wasteland, or if Three dog is moving somewhere else. Also, there were rumors last year that Bethesda was looking in Boston for locations.

That's good to hear. Mr. New Vegas put me to sleep. 

eiffel
That's good to hear. Mr. New Vegas put me to sleep.

I couldn't get into New Vegas at all, it had nothing to do with the writing, but the environment, and the colors were just bland to me. I played FO3, and all of the dlcs, and I don't know why I couldn't touch New Vegas.

New vegas is the only bethesda game I liked until Dishonored came out. Bethesda made games are bland imo. I don't really get New vegas colors being bland when Fallout 3 was just grey...all the time. Well...anyhow, Bethesda games if you are in it for nothing but exploration. Other devs(such as New vegas creators) if you're looking for a good RPG.

LtSkittles


"To all my #Fallout3 and #ThreeDog fans: There may be more of the Dog coming! Fingers crossed!" https://twitter.com/ETDel...tus/288757510406557697 ETD is the voice of the capital wasteland, so I'm not sure if this means another Fallout game in the capital wasteland, or if Three dog is moving somewhere else. Also, there were rumors last year that Bethesda was looking in Boston for locations.

Maybe he is somehow broadcasting to other places like..... BOSTON?! I really hope it is set in Boston. Oh well, we should know soon. I don't think they'd have given him the go ahead if they weren't close to announcing it.

More Three Dog implies a direct sequel or prequel to Fallout 3, or maybe just relocation of Three Dog. Interesting.

Please be a sequel to F3, New Vegas wasn't good.

N4G Adventure Part 1 - screw it

New Vegas was great. Better than F3 in a lot of ways.

I played 3 after NV and i found it much better, to each their own i guess.

N4G Adventure Part 1 - screw it

I like both, and would rank 3 above NV, but only barely.

Megaton


I like both, and would rank 3 above NV, but only barely.

 


New Vegas had its merits but Fallout 3 just seemed more polished and focused.

I think the main thing was that fallout 3 actually felt like a post apocalyptic game whereas new Vegas just felt like a western.

I don't see why 3 is so highly praised, personally. I've yet to play New Vegas.

Never played FO3, but New Vegas was one of the best RPGs I have played this gen, If Bethesda games weren't broken on PS3, I would buy them day one.

Megaton


I like both, and would rank 3 above NV, but only barely.

Agreed. I rank 3 above NV because NV is the expansion that doesn't change anything but simply reuses what worked in 3. Fallout is the original and therefore my favourite of the two. Both are fantastic non-Bioware (i.e. longer with more depth) RPG's for consoles. And to those who haven't played them now is a great time to do so since you can get the game and all DLC for $20. The one negative I'd give Fallout 3 are the 2 hour DLC missions that costs me $10. I learned my lesson to not buy them for NV. 

This guys tweet below gives 100% confirmation:

 "How was that for a tease! I was given permission to release that tease, so fingers crossed."

Welcome to next gen:

 I enjoyed FO3 and NV, I'd get another game if they make one.

NeverEnding1989

Megaton


I like both, and would rank 3 above NV, but only barely.

Agreed. I rank 3 above NV because NV is the expansion that doesn't change anything but simply reuses what worked in 3. Fallout is the original and therefore my favourite of the two. Both are fantastic non-Bioware (i.e. longer with more depth) RPG's for consoles. And to those who haven't played them now is a great time to do so since you can get the game and all DLC for $20. The one negative I'd give Fallout 3 are the 2 hour DLC missions that costs me $10. I learned my lesson to not buy them for NV. 

There were fallout games before Number three you know.

NeverEnding1989

Megaton


I like both, and would rank 3 above NV, but only barely.

Agreed. I rank 3 above NV because NV is the expansion that doesn't change anything but simply reuses what worked in 3. Fallout is the original and therefore my favourite of the two. Both are fantastic non-Bioware (i.e. longer with more depth) RPG's for consoles. And to those who haven't played them now is a great time to do so since you can get the game and all DLC for $20. The one negative I'd give Fallout 3 are the 2 hour DLC missions that costs me $10. I learned my lesson to not buy them for NV. 

What are you talking about? Each DLC expansion was close to 20 hours long each. 

ZombieNinjaPanda


There were fallout games before Number three you know.

Yes, Fallout "3" is not the first of the series. Great observation! If PC games mattered in the slightest I would have upgraded my desktop long ago, instead of the six years and counting.

Eiffel
 

What are you talking about? Each DLC expansion was close to 20 hours long each.  

 

20hrs? I bought Operation Anchorage, the Pitt, and Broken Steel. The latter was pretty solid, but the other two were 4-5hrs at the most and were crap. I felt like I paid $10 for some armor and weapons that I wouldn't even use in the main game.

Welcome to next gen:

NeverEnding1989

ZombieNinjaPanda


There were fallout games before Number three you know.

Yes, Fallout "3" is not the first of the series. Great observation! If PC games mattered in the slightest I would have upgraded my desktop long ago, instead of the six years and counting.

Goes to show your taste. People consider Fallout 3 a low in the series, especially storywise. But I guess anything more than an FPS is too complex for you. Either way, they matter much more than your precious console games but I guess to you what started the whole series doesn't mean ****.


This situation reminds me of those retards who think Final Fantasy 7 is the first final fantasy in the series.

ZombieNinjaPanda

NeverEnding1989

ZombieNinjaPanda


There were fallout games before Number three you know.

Yes, Fallout "3" is not the first of the series. Great observation! If PC games mattered in the slightest I would have upgraded my desktop long ago, instead of the six years and counting.

Goes to show your taste. People consider Fallout 3 a low in the series, especially storywise. But I guess anything more than an FPS is too complex for you. Either way, they matter much more than your precious console games but I guess to you what started the whole series doesn't mean ****.


This situation reminds me of those retards who think Final Fantasy 7 is the first final fantasy in the series.

See this is the problem with PC fanboys. Anything that consoles players like just enrages them, they just end up cussing or insulting someone. To them it's illogical to like a game that's a later instalment in the series if it's made it's way onto consoles. You might not like it, but other people do, deal with it. No one cares if the series has been consolised, we just play it and laugh at you.

It's like they think they're game connoisseurs, that only old games have positives. They sit their stroking their mouse, probably swirling it like a glass of wine, ****ting on everyone's opinions simply because you like a console game more then a PC game. The horror! THE HORROR!