The game is 40 (US)and a surprise hit for a franchise that wasn't well known. The situations are nothing alike. If they do Helldivers Saturn in a year or two, I have a feeling the reception won't be nearly as warm.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Why Don't We Get More Games Like Fallout: New Vegas?
- Thread starter EMBee99
- Start date
Unironically, I'm pretty sure Zenimax and Bethesda did think they were capitalising on Skyrim's huge success with ESO. I guess they just heard all the requests for multiplayer in Skyrim and never really figured out that MMORPGS and Bethesda RPGs are different beasts
BGS has to update the engine, too (from Oblivion to FO3). Obsidian didn't, right?
Fallout New Vegas sold as well as Fallout 3 did. Surprisingly common misconception.
I'm almost certain that Fallout NV's sales figures have never been appreciably lower than Fallout 3's. I don't know why people believe otherwise.
Last edited:
I think AAA games are less passionate now. Most of the AAA publishers are playing safer. Creative games like Cyberpunk 2077, Baldur's Gate III, Elden Ring are extremely rare. Even modern Obsidian is shell of the former self. That's why we see creative indie titles that are more fun than AAA games.
I think the issue is that even if you use an existing engine it is still a lot of work to make a new game, so by the time you get it out the engine is going to feel super dated. I feel like in the more AAA space the only way to make it work would be to have two teams working on projects that overlap to avoid having the second game come out and feel dated.
Some smaller scale devs doing less ambitious projects do it though. Like I'm fairly sure the Atelier Ryza games all use the same engine, with new stuff added in for each game (and Gust had been doing the same thing for previous Atelier games). That allowed them to release the 3 Ryza games in around 4 years. The expectations for assets in those games is substantially lower than what is typically expected for AAA games though.
Some smaller scale devs doing less ambitious projects do it though. Like I'm fairly sure the Atelier Ryza games all use the same engine, with new stuff added in for each game (and Gust had been doing the same thing for previous Atelier games). That allowed them to release the 3 Ryza games in around 4 years. The expectations for assets in those games is substantially lower than what is typically expected for AAA games though.
I did play the 360 versions, New vegas was significantly worse than 3 and Skyrim.
And I played on the PS3 and Skyrim became literally unplayable, forget crashing. The fact these games were as rated as highly as they were when they had such huge issues was a joke.
It has to be a pride thing at this point. BGS knows that other devs can make better games in their engine.
Doubt its pride and more that it takes management time to manage the relationship with the other studio on the project. Probably BGS has a plan and only so much bandwidth to put that into action. Slotting one more project into it, and having another studio doing it, still requires some level of oversight.
I don't think it's this at all. I know some like this narrative. BGS games sell like crazy and are some of the most played games on their respective platforms year after year, sometimes over a decade later.
My guess is the resources required to support drain to much from their internal teams' efforts.
This thinking applies to every single publisher/studio that isn't actively letting other devs/studios make in-universe games with their IPs then.
Crazy because we played Fallout 3 and New Vegas on both consoles. Besides some lag here and there it was mostly fine on 360. New Vegas would chug to single digits if you got anywhere near Forlorn Hope on PS3.
Skyrim seemed to work fine on both consoles until you put in enough time and hours into a play through then it didn't work anymore on PS3 unless you found ways to clear some memory.
You'd think there's a multi year blood feud between Bethesda and dozens of people if the internet is to be believed. But like pretty much everyone of influence has nothing but nice things to say about their working experience with Bethesda. And people at Bethesda are happy to talk about their love of the games not made by them.
Yea I thought it was pretty cool when I found out too! It came from a short retrospective series Bethesda did back in 2022.
View: https://youtu.be/QSw3oNnklZM?si=NQNsftQeiYMCNfH8
The first minute is Todd talking about it. Kinda wished they did a long form version of it. They could show so many cool behind the scenes things even fallout YouTubers can't find through interviews haha.
I get the feeling there was bad blood after New Vegas, from both companies, which could be why Bethesda hasn't gone out of house since. Personally I would love another Obsidian game like NV but I'm also happy with them making their own games.
...how many game studios are left at this point that
1.) Are independent and not owned by a larger group
2.) have the ability to make AAA games
Companies like Obsidian (New Vegas), Ninja Theory (DmC), Ready at Dawn (God of War spinoffs, Daxter), who were able to freelance and work on IP for various studios are now owned by larger publishers. The last few years have seen some independent studios that tried making AAA games go through heavy layoffs- Striking Distance Studios (Callisto Protocol) and Ascendant Studios (Immortals of Aveum) are two of the bigger examples. Sure, you constantly have new studios spinning up with "former members of XXX big company", but how many of them actually want to make whatever their first game is be a re-use of someone elses IP for a "B" game?
1.) Are independent and not owned by a larger group
2.) have the ability to make AAA games
Companies like Obsidian (New Vegas), Ninja Theory (DmC), Ready at Dawn (God of War spinoffs, Daxter), who were able to freelance and work on IP for various studios are now owned by larger publishers. The last few years have seen some independent studios that tried making AAA games go through heavy layoffs- Striking Distance Studios (Callisto Protocol) and Ascendant Studios (Immortals of Aveum) are two of the bigger examples. Sure, you constantly have new studios spinning up with "former members of XXX big company", but how many of them actually want to make whatever their first game is be a re-use of someone elses IP for a "B" game?
Not even really a nowadays thing, Nintendo released Doki Doki Panic as SMB2USA because "The Lost Levels" was mostly reused SMB1 assets with increased difficulty.
I always figured because games now are even more a product of multiple studios working together that outsourcing to a third party is more cumbersome than staying in the same circle, or at least it's not worth giving up control and having the perceived stink of being a "real" follow up. Add in complications like Bethesda games using their own engine with all the idiosyncrasies and bespoke solutions that it ends up being just as much a resource investment have people on hand to help the other studio figure it out.
There's a number of factors at play and pride won't be it.
a) Can they find a partner they want to work with and who also wants and has the bandwidth to do such a project?
b) Does BGS have the framework in place to oversee the project as well as provide engine support. Working with an external partner can be extremely challenging due to different team/studio cultures. ?
c) Have they been pitched something that they feel fits within what the long term goals for the brand are?
The stories of Bethesda being unhappy with the reception of FO:NV is from the publisher not developer perspective.
People forget that FO:NV when released was even buggier than FO3 or Oblivion and it's general reception suffered because of it.
Man I was upset when they resurrected Fallout to make it a First person Elder Scrolls reskin. It wasn't until New Vegas announced and released that I was able to let it go and give Fallout 3 a shot. Pity that NV is likely the last great Fallout we get.
I do wish they'd allow more varied takes on the universe tho. I still fire up Fallout Tactics once in a while and I remember having some fun in the Brotherhood of Steel game. Maybe one day.
I do wish they'd allow more varied takes on the universe tho. I still fire up Fallout Tactics once in a while and I remember having some fun in the Brotherhood of Steel game. Maybe one day.
I've never understood why a company like EA or Activision doesn't take all those gun models they've painstakingly created for Battlefield and COD and just use them in a new franchise. Try out a bunch of different shooter styles and just recycle that work. They're realistic guns, it's not like they're taking unique Mass Effect weapons or something. Stop trying to stuff modes into everything and start using your assets to create a bigger portfolio of projects.
I played it on PS3 a couple months after launch. It was fine, or atleast not really worse than my Fallout 3 PS3 experience (which I bet people here will argue is terrible). Dark Souls 1 was also janky as hell in a few places, though arguably in a different way.
100%! This is a really silly argument.
That's complete bull when you factor how little they had to do with New Vegas and how phenomenal that game turned out considering it's 18 month dev time.
Yeah it's been mentioned before by devs here but the situation back then when these games were common was the devs were making peanuts, worked 80 hour weeks, and had far fewer benefits.
Now, that's all been improved to varying degrees, and one of the trade-offs is that you'll see fewer titles grinded out over like a year
The argument that Bethesda won't let Obsidian mess with their IP anymore out of pride is a little silly since it's Microsoft's IP now and they own both studios. If Microsoft wanted Obsidian to make a New Vegas II instead of Outer Worlds II, it would happen. That it isn't happening means that they probably expect the sales for either to be comparable and that Obsidian itself would rather work on OW2.
Which is a shame, because I liked New Vegas far more than Outer Worlds. (Despite FNV being just an astoundingly buggy game.)
Which is a shame, because I liked New Vegas far more than Outer Worlds. (Despite FNV being just an astoundingly buggy game.)
They would have to have more than one lead designer/writer. Its literally the same lead guy on their recent games, Starfield, Fallout 4, Elder Scrolls, etc. Compare that with excellent story writing and dialogue in Cyberpunk 2077 and Witcher 3 which had multiple writers and designers. This is the area that needs the most improvement in Bethesda games and I feel is falling behind, characters and quests just seem flat and lacking umph.
I don't think it's "complete bull" to think that after releasing three entries and a show that they would want more oversight on another collaboration.
Saying that Bethesda's pride is fine doesn't diminish the effort or quality of NV btw.
With the amount of wait time between some of these series it would've been perfect to have smaller scale Elder Scrolls and Fallout games. I'm one of the few forum posters who prefer Fallout 3 because online New Vegas is the 2nd coming but I had a great time with New Vegas as well. Would've loved something after Skyrim.
Ppl get upset at the thought of an "easy" mode for Souls games. Hardcore gamers can be so damn weird sometimes.
People simulataneously want games to release faster but get upset at any game that seemingly reuses assets/worlds/etc
I don't think their pride is fine. They make games that sell well but critically, and within the community, the consensus is that their last good game was Skyrim.
Fallout 4 is widely seen as the worst BGS era Fallout (yes, I'm aware it sold well), 76 is a mess and let's not even start with Starfield. We know they refused pitches for both additional Elder Scrolls and Fallout games in their engine. Todd is VERY aware that whoever they license to make a Fallout game will make a better game than them.
It's clear they're refusing that anyone but them make the big SP Fallout and Elder Scrolls games as a form of job security. Because the second you get another New Vegas situation, BGS is cooked. They're outclassed by just about every prolific developer. And I am a diehard fallout 3 and NV fan. They're my favorite games. BGS just fell off and that's what it is.
What consensus? Their "worst" Fallout was a game of the year winner.
Fallout 4 and Starfield were both good games they just weren't as good as their other other good games.
New Vegas still took a ton of Obsidians resources and it was during a time they were still stuck working among different publishers. It also ended up a buggy mess.
But the real answer is: we do. Atelier games are a good example, but so is Final Fantasy 7 Rebirth.
Monster Hunter is another example. Resident Evil post 7 is another. TOTK. Splatoon.
But the real answer is: we do. Atelier games are a good example, but so is Final Fantasy 7 Rebirth.
Monster Hunter is another example. Resident Evil post 7 is another. TOTK. Splatoon.
Big DLC has taken on the role of "quick turn around sequel" but even those take forever these days.
I've been watching some Tim Cain retrospectives on Fallout 1 lately and it's insane how small teams were back then and how quickly decisions about major gameplay elements were both came up with and implemented.
I've been watching some Tim Cain retrospectives on Fallout 1 lately and it's insane how small teams were back then and how quickly decisions about major gameplay elements were both came up with and implemented.
I bought it for PC at release and it was fine, in the sense that it came with the same amount of weird jank you'd expect from any Bethesda release. It was worse on console because of the patch certification process, but hey, it crashed less than Morrowind or Oblivion! Fallout 3 was also a fucking mess in its time. The PC version of FO3 spent a long time being shackled to GWFL, if anyone remembers that.
The whole "Obsidian can't do QA" occasionally feels like a self-fulfilling prophecy - in the case of New Vegas, you could just as easily blame Bethesda's creaky engine sagging under the weight of what Obsidian made it do.
I would absolutely be down for that cancelled (or never started) "Obsidian does Skyrim" game, I'm afraid Avowed is gonna turn out like The Outer Worlds - fun, playable, actually kinda polished? But ultimately risk-averse gaming comfort food
Which studio wouldn't love to crunch to put out a AAA sequel in record time, being denied Boni because of "metacritic" milestones and getting 0 benefit of the massive amount of sales.
Sounds like a great deal for the contracted dev.
I really wonder where all the studios are used to do this
Sounds like a great deal for the contracted dev.
I really wonder where all the studios are used to do this
Lmao it was "goty" by some guy I'm sure. But come on, 2015 was Bloodborne and Witcher 3. It's insane to think Fallout 4 competes.
Last edited: