Jump to content

R* should try a Fallout game.


Zackyoung1

Recommended Posts

So as we know R* are the Kings of open world games, now I understand there's a Mad Max open world game coming out but hear out my reasons to why R* would rock a end of the world game. (by standards I mean world is destroyed and left in ruins where bandits roam the lands and kill everything)

 

1-World

R* is able to create maps that are so vast and detail they only get better every game. Now imagine, New York, Las Vegas, L.A., San Francisco, and now imagine these cities destroyed and left in ruins, it would beat any Fallout game, and would bring a whole new game for us to play, it would be like the jump they did to make RDR, amazing. Also the maps would be huge, and detailed, and if they were to make cars, bikes, etc have gas, then travelling the map would be smart.

 

2-Gameplay

R* has some of the best gameplay features, they allow for long, medium, close range combat, stealth, and as always great stories.

 

3-Guns

Now in GTA V they introduced weapon customization, which was one of the best thing about the game, but now imagine rusted guns and stuff like that. R* has some of the best gun mechanics in the gaming industry and they only seem to improve, plus they could add newer features that could fit a end of the world game.

 

4-Graphics

Since it would be on newer consoles and we've seen what GTA V is going to look like, then we can assume view distance will be insane, textures intense, and other things that would bring a dead world alive. Personally I think R* should use PhysX, it would allow for amazing particle effects like sand storms, explosions, debris, and other neat stuff, watch a PhysX video if you don't know what it is. Also npc's would have great detail like Crysis 3, with skin that looks real, and real behaviors, like if you shoot someone in the leg they hop away or crawl.

 

5-Key Features

The game of course would be rated M, but something I think R* should add is gore, the game would be absolute inhumane and how savage humans are, so brutal violence would be a must. Levolution, the destruction system battlefield uses, it would allow for amazing moments that a lot of open world games don't get. Intense customization options, choose what you look like, wear, what your gun looks like and does and stuff. Guns should have attachments, some being a flashlight duct taped to the gun or maybe finding a real flashlight attachment, point is there would be makeshift attachments and real attachments. Transportation would be very important but very hard, cars, and bikes would need to be filled up and gas wont be cheap, Mad Max style. Combat would be similar to GTA V on how the guns work but hand to hand would be closer to Sleeping Dogs. Co-op I think would be a smart and fun idea for a game like this, not only would you have to wander huge cities and wastelands, but you'd have to fight off raiders, and a corrupt government, and maybe zombie things. Long, long, long campaign, much longer than GTA V, like three times longer than what Skyrim was and with a huge amount of side missions.

 

These are just some ideas, R* rocked the world when they introduced GTA, and the shocked the world when they did RDR, R* is just a genius when it comes to doing new stuff. What do you guys/girls think?

 

Update: My idea

So the game would be set two hundred years in the future, but the world ended in 2024, so technology wouldn't be super sci-fi but there would be some cool tech we don't have today. Anyways the game would take place on the West coast, From San Francisco to L.A. and maybe some Las Vegas.

 

The environment would be different in the different areas of course, In San Francisco the city would be over come by nature, and the weather would be raining, foggy, and constant storms. The L.A. area would be radiated from being hit by a small dirty bomb, however the weather would be sunny with rare storms, and very little nature in the city. Now the Death Valley Vegas area would well be the desert with a lot of sandstorms and no vegetation at all.

 

The character would be a platform of your choosing, you customize the character and depending on their features it will choose preset backstories that fit your character. Features you could have is choosing height, body build, race, gender, eye color, scars, hair, voice, and some beginning skills.

 

Clothing would be a mix of Book of Eli and Mad Max, there would be the normal post-apocalypse clothing and then the freak clothing worn by bandits and crazies, and lastly military clothing worn by corrupt new governments that try and control sectors of the world.

 

Enemies would consist of absolute crazies, the more sane bandits, and a few different fractions that want to control the wasteland. Now of course there would be the melee type that use knives, axes, pipes, etc to harm you, then the normal gun grunts, now depending on the bad guy depends on how smart they are. Some bad guys wont use cover while other will and even flank you, depending on their skill, I think the system should be similar to the new LoTR game were bad guys learn.

 

Weapons would be pretty modern, with the exception of some unique weapons, so M4's and 1911's and the normal would be the weapons most use, with some being special. Now one thing I think would be neat is makeshift weapons, not like Dead Rising just a little more possible, Like a lighter and a spray can, or tazer arrow tips, poisoned spiked brass knuckles.

 

Transportation would be rare, by limiting fast transportation it can makes a large map feel even bigger. Now the vehicles that would be offered would be cars, trucks, bikes, and some other military vehicles, and each vehicle would be decked out in armor and stuff to be safe and dangerous. Vehicles would be customizable and more importantly vehicles would run off gas, so as soon as you have a ride you cant just roam everywhere.

 

Multiplayer similar to GTAO would be the idea, however servers would locate players accordingly, players who are friendly, players who are dicks, and cheaters. The online mode would be your SP character and you would continue after the story is beat, so really the story never ends. Also 4 player co-op would be fun for the story mode, so taking on foes would be fun, but if you do use co-op the difficulty would rise.

 

Changing world, and by that I mean real changes you can see in the game caused by your actions. Changes wont be simple, they will be complex, you will be treated differently and even environments could change.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Zackyoung1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What are you, five?

 

You're like a kid in primary school when they're like "OH MY GOD WOULDN'T IT BE AWESOME IF THEY MIXED TOGETHER (list of every f*cking game this little sh*t has played)? YEAH MAN I SHOULD BE A GAME DESIGNER."

 

Ever heard of a budget?

Ever heard of Rockstar make third person games on RAGE?

If Rockstar made a Bethesda game it would suck.

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be honest, as cool as all this sounds, Rockstar making a Fallout game in specific probably wouldn't work out too well, as Fallout carries with it vast amounts of lore, history and backstory, all of which would need to be addressed and I'm not Rockstar's writers could manage to still create and interesting, engaging and coherent narrative after such a severe change in the subject of their writing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So instead of cash cards, there'll be cap cards.

Edited by Vercetti42
  • Like 2

I have moved to a new account.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9674878_orig.jpg

I mean the wait times for games will be the same but fallout is such a bethesda kind of game...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fallout isn't a Bethesda game, it's an Obsidian game if anything, but that's irrelevant, Fallout is an IP almost any talented developer could touch and make an amazing game out of it just because it's got such a vast mythos and lore behind it, just because none of you have played the original Fallouts doesn't make me yell from the rooftops that Bethesda should never have touched the series because it feels far too much like an Interplay Entertainment game for Bethesda to make any use of the IP, at least in any interesting way.

 

I'd be wrong to say that there and you'd most certainly be wrong to say it here, the fact of the matter is that Fallout is IP gold, and anyone who denies that clearly doesn't understand that a videogame series that's as obscure as Fallout surviving and thriving in the gaming industry for nearly twenty years is a monumental achievement, and one that proves that if Rockstar were to somehow come into ownership of the Fallout series, they'd have no issues whatsoever creating a brilliant, but different Fallout experience to what we're used to, though if there's one thing that Fallout proves, it's that unlike war, it always changes, and in most cases for the better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Revenge of the Donut

I think a post-apocalyptic game by Rockstar would have the potential to be great, but I think they should leave Fallout to Bethesda/Obsidian.

Edited by Revenge of the Donut
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Rockstar made a Bethesda game it would suck.

EVER HEARD OF A BUDGET?

EVER HEARD OF BETHESDA MAKE FIRST-PERSON GAYUMS ON GAMEBYRO

IF BETHESDA MADE AN INTERPLAY ENTERTAINMENT GAME IT WOULD TEH SUCK SO HURD.

 

f*ck off with your nonsense.

Edited by Secura
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Set in the GTA Universe,with the first two game being Subtitled but using the GTA moniker,then later games could drop it...IT WOULD ROCK!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, that really would be terrible, awful on a scale I can't even comprehend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

If Rockstar made a Bethesda game it would suck.

EVER HEARD OF A BUDGET?

EVER HEARD OF BETHESDA MAKE FIRST-PERSON GAYUMS ON GAMEBYRO

IF BETHESDA MADE AN INTERPLAY ENTERTAINMENT GAME IT WOULD TEH SUCK SO HURD.

 

f*ck off with your nonsense.

 

no, that made sense because Fallout was an RPG, and Bethesda were amaking Elder Scrolls which was also an RPG. Bethesda could have Fallout play similar to Elder Scrolls because of the theme.

 

Rockstar make third person action games. Max Payne, GTA, Red Dead, on their own engine because that's what they're good at. Their storylines revolve around crime.

 

You can't just have them suddenly switch to a post apocalyptic roleplaying game on a different engine with different lore, different gameplay and different style. The game would suck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no, that made sense because Fallout was an RPG, and Bethesda were amaking Elder Scrolls which was also an RPG. Bethesda could have Fallout play similar to Elder Scrolls because of the theme.

A fantasy first-person RPG series on an entirely different engine vs an isometric top-down turn-based RPG set in a post-apocalyptic version of the 1950's depiction of future America? No, Lazy they do not fit the same theme in the f*cking slightest, they were part of the same genre, and to be entirely honest GTA has more RPG elements today than it's ever had before, Rockstar could quite easily make that transition, I mean they've already had a whirl at the apocalypse theme with Undead Nightmare and that DLC was freaking awesome.

 

Rockstar make third person action games. Max Payne, GTA, Red Dead, on their own engine because that's what they're good at. Their storylines revolve around crime.

Bethesda are in the same boat seeing as The Elder Scrolls storylines revolved around ancient steampunk races, dragons and alternate dimensions of reality, don't try to pull any, "it's not relevant" bullsh*t with me, as The Elder Scrolls and Fallout are as about as far-removed from each other as humanly possible, and yet Bethesda still managed to make an entirely different, but still brilliant Fallout game, a game developer's past when it comes to what genre of games they make at least, tells you nothing of how they'd manage in a different field, I mean for f*ck's sake, Rockstar made f*cking Lemmings.

 

You can't just have them suddenly switch to a post apocalyptic roleplaying game on a different engine with different lore, different gameplay and different style. The game would suck.

That is precisely what Bethesda did with Fallout 3, did it suck? Well, did it Lazy?

Edited by Secura
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fallout 3 was an RPG? I needed a good laugh today.

I have moved to a new account.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fallout 3 was an RPG? I needed a good laugh today.

Ahem.

 

 

A role-playing game (RPG and sometimes roleplaying game) is a game in which players assume the roles of characters in a fictional setting. Players take responsibility for acting out these roles within a narrative, either through literal acting or through a process of structured decision-making or character development. Actions taken within many games succeed or fail according to a formal system of rules and guidelines.
Edited by Kalvin
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You didn't get the sarcasm, Kal.

 

But I still stick by what I said. Fallout 3 wasn't even close to being an RPG for me. To me it felt like playing a terrible FPS.

I have moved to a new account.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow Kalvin, you actually did something cool for once. I must be getting tired...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He probably got some fresh air.

 

Also Secura, Fallout 3 did indeed suck.

Edited by Vercetti42

I have moved to a new account.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fallout 3 was pretty rigid for an RPG, but that's just the way Bethesda is. F3 was not a bad game, even though I haven't been able to play it since NV came out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing I find laughable about Fallout 3 is (being an RPG), that it does not have MULTIPLE ENDINGS!

 

Jesus Christ Bethesda, I know it has slightly different variants but it should have at lead two largely different endings.

 

The only thing that I truly loved about Fallout 3 was it's atmosphere, which was top notch. The economy system was nice, the prologue (getting out of the vault, being born... etc) was awesome, exploration was decent but apart from that the game failed for me in every other department

Edited by Vercetti42

I have moved to a new account.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

no, that made sense because Fallout was an RPG, and Bethesda were amaking Elder Scrolls which was also an RPG. Bethesda could have Fallout play similar to Elder Scrolls because of the theme.

A fantasy first-person RPG series on an entirely different engine vs an isometric top-down turn-based RPG set in a post-apocalyptic version of the 1950's depiction of future America? No, Lazy they do not fit the same theme in the f*cking slightest, they were part of the same genre, and to be entirely honest GTA has more RPG elements today than it's ever had before, Rockstar could quite easily make that transition, I mean they've already had a whirl at the apocalypse theme with Undead Nightmare and that DLC was freaking awesome.

 

 

Rockstar make third person action games. Max Payne, GTA, Red Dead, on their own engine because that's what they're good at. Their storylines revolve around crime.

Bethesda are in the same boat seeing as The Elder Scrolls storylines revolved around ancient steampunk races, dragons and alternate dimensions of reality, don't try to pull any, "it's not relevant" bullsh*t with me, as The Elder Scrolls and Fallout are as about as far-removed from each other as humanly possible, and yet Bethesda still managed to make an entirely different, but still brilliant Fallout game, a game developer's past when it comes to what genre of games they make at least, tells you nothing of how they'd manage in a different field, I mean for f*ck's sake, Rockstar made f*cking Lemmings.

 

 

You can't just have them suddenly switch to a post apocalyptic roleplaying game on a different engine with different lore, different gameplay and different style. The game would suck.

That is precisely what Bethesda did with Fallout 3, did it suck? Well, did it Lazy?

 

Gameplay wise, Fallout and Elder Scrolls are very similar. They're both RPGs. Level up, explore a map, get new weapons and armour, do quests etc.

 

And yes, Fallout 3 did actually kind of suck. It's good, yes, and I enjoyed it, but it's VERY flawed.

 

The storyline sucks. The decision making sucked. The Karma system sucked. The combat sucked. The way enemies levelled sucked. And it was buggy as hell.

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought and still do believe today that Fallout 3 is absolutely fantastic, it may not have aged perfectly when it comes to mechanics, but it's still one of the best open-world RPG's out there today, and no Ace, not every RPG needs multiple endings, case in-point FF VII, arguably the greatest RPG ever made, and yet it only has one ending.

 

E:

Gameplay wise, Fallout and Elder Scrolls are very similar. They're both RPGs. Level up, explore a map, get new weapons and armour, do quests etc.

Let me ask you a question Lazy, does exploring a map, getting new weapons, armour and doing missions sound similar to you? Because Rockstar's been creating games with those systems within them for nearly twenty years at this point, and they've become exceedingly proficient at it. So by using your logic, Rockstar would be a prime candidate for developing a game in the Fallout universe.

 

The storyline sucks. The decision making sucked. The Karma system sucked. The combat sucked. The way enemies levelled sucked. And it was buggy as hell.

Well, if it sucks so badly why wouldn't you want Rockstar to try their hands at it? Clearly you think it's an awful game, and therefore it should be put in the hands of a more competent developer, who better than one like Rockstar, who's got both experience, the financial backing and of course the know-how of how to make a game like Fallout, at least on a gameplay level work nicely.

 

Look, you're just digging a deeper hole, I'd suggest you give up and quit arguing this corner as you're almost reaching the point of saying Fallout sucks, therefore no-one should develop any more of it, blah, blah, blah.

Edited by Secura
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Secura, I would have actually liked Fallout 3 a lot more had the story and the quests been more interesting. The story was bland and the quests too repetitive.

 

On the other hand it certainly has one of the most immersive video gaming worlds ever. I was always on the alert in the wasteland, looking around for mutants and super mutants. It almost felt like I was in the wasteland. That was just amazing.

 

While it isn't a bad game, it's vastly overrated IMO. It's a decent game but I expected it to be a lot more tactical. Heck, I was actually reading walkthroughs and guides to help me but as it turned out I didn't need any.

I have moved to a new account.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be fair I can let the bad combat slide as it was the first 3D fallout game. (And am I the only one who actually likes VATS?). But the story was just so disappointing.

Edited by Vercetti42

I have moved to a new account.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

VATS just got in the way after a while. I prefer to just kill people the old fashioned way.

 

Plus VATS would screw you if you were a low skill level in whatever weapon type you were using. F*ck that noise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meh, I found the story quite engaging, the issue was more to do with the black and white nature of the Brotherhood of Steel in Fallout 3 than the story itself, in fact I think Fallout 3 contains some of the most interesting side-quests and details I've ever seen in a videogame, the woman in that bridge town suffering from PTSD, Desmond vs Calvert, the entirety of The Pitt and of course anything at all to do with Vault 112/Tranquility Lane.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Lazyboy forgot that Fallout 1 and 2 were top-down and turn based

didn't stop them from making fallout 3 first person and real time

so what's the matter with making it third person?

If they keep RPG elements instead of making it pure action, it's fine to me

Edited by Bat Guano
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not that it's third person, it's just that R* games play completely differently to the type of game Fallout should be.

 

 

This is such a stupid discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok so I didn't mean Fallout like the series Fallout, but the damn genre of end of the world, apocalypse, Last of Us. Even at the top I said now the Fallout games but the genre of the world is over and you roam it. Oh and Lazyboy as much you are entitled to your opinion you completely missed the concept of what I was saying, no sh*t if R* tried to do a Bethesda or Obsidian game it wouldn't be that great, but that's not what I said, I said fallout genre as in the world has endind and you play in a world that is in fallout. Lastly Lazyboy if you're talking about budgets, GTA V is the most expensive game to date, and made a pretty good profit so they have the money to do what they want.

 

I will make a quick edit so everyone can stop sh*tting them selves about the confusion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • 1 User Currently Viewing
    0 members, 0 Anonymous, 1 Guest

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using GTAForums.com, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.