#1 Edited by Sackmanjones (4761 posts) -

I'm on my phone so I can't post the links but kotaku and ign have received leaked casting calls and scripts from the game. Although the game isn't mentioned in it the line "war. War never changes"

Is present which makes it obvious that this is gonna be fallout. The game is also set in Massachusetts like rumors said (which were actually correct surprisingly!) I know it was somewhat obvious fallout 4 was coming but after the heartbreak that was the survivor 2299 site, I hope this mends some broken hearts. Hopefully we get a glimpse of this thing soon.

Here is the ign link but I can't hyperlink it, sorry lazy people.

http://m.ign.com/articles/2013/12/11/fallout-4-exists-and-its-set-in-massachusetts

And here is the original kotaku one

http://kotaku.com/leaked-documents-reveal-that-fallout-4-is-real-set-in-1481322956

#3 Posted by ll_Exile_ll (1934 posts) -

I don't think there was ever really any doubt that the game is development, and this "confirmation" isn't exactly mind blowing. Of course the game is real, but without seeing a trailer or something, just saying that it exists isn't enough to create any kind of excitement.

#4 Edited by Humanity (10111 posts) -
#5 Edited by Sackmanjones (4761 posts) -

@ll_exile_ll: considering the response from the survivor website, even the thought of a fallout 4 in the next year or 2 is very exciting to a lot if people. Especially on the new consoles.

#6 Posted by DeadeyeMcCoy (259 posts) -

@ll_exile_ll said:

I don't think there was ever really any doubt that the game is development, and this "confirmation" isn't exactly mind blowing. Of course the game is real, but without seeing a trailer or something, just saying that it exists isn't enough to create any kind of excitement.

Still, I'd expect it's enough to serve as a pick-me-up to the fans who walked away from thesurvivor2299 severely let down.

#7 Posted by Xeiphyer (5611 posts) -

And in 2+ years you might be able to play it!

Super way too early to get excited at all.

#8 Posted by Sackmanjones (4761 posts) -

@humanity: thank you! If you don't mind I also added the kotaku link which is a much more in depth story and includes the leaked document.

#9 Edited by Colourful_Hippie (4495 posts) -

Will wait for trailer before I start getting excited, of course it's in development.

#10 Edited by Ravelle (1411 posts) -

Will they introduce a new properly working engine or will they continue with their current engine with potato head people.

#11 Posted by Tennmuerti (8174 posts) -

@humanity said:

Always happy to lend a helping hand, with the caveat that I personally thought Fallout 3 and New Vegas were awful Fallout games and average RPG's.

Link: IGN - Fallout 4 is real!!!!!!!

That's pretty much exactly the same way I qualify F3. Terrible Fallout game, average rpg, good game.

Eerie ....

#12 Posted by ll_Exile_ll (1934 posts) -

@ll_exile_ll: considering the response from the survivor website, even the thought of a fallout 4 in the next year or 2 is very exciting to a lot if people. Especially on the new consoles.

Don't get me wrong, I can't wait to play Fallout 4. It's just that, since Bethesda publicly stated earlier in the year that they were done with Skyrim DLC and that the whole staff had shifted over to "their next project" it's been ridiculously obvious they're working on the next Fallout game.

It's just a part of the whole stupid cycle the video game industry sticks to where even though everyone knows a game is being made, developers and publishers like to keep it secret and act like it's a big surprise when they announce it. Until they show the game I prefer to just ignore the whole coy bullshit act that surrounds "unannounced" sequels.

#13 Posted by erhard (440 posts) -

I hope they use the same old updated Oblivion engine because that would be funny.

#14 Posted by Humanity (10111 posts) -

@tennmuerti: Well I stray from the formula as I don't think they were particularly great games on their own either, just average, kinda muddy and drab looking with a ton of quests but really uninteresting locales. They showed glints of promise in several quests but overall just kinda "ehh" for me.

#15 Posted by Oldirtybearon (4891 posts) -

@tennmuerti said:

@humanity said:

Always happy to lend a helping hand, with the caveat that I personally thought Fallout 3 and New Vegas were awful Fallout games and average RPG's.

Link: IGN - Fallout 4 is real!!!!!!!

That's pretty much exactly the same way I qualify F3. Terrible Fallout game, average rpg, good game.

Eerie ....

I wonder if this kind of response would be less frequent if Bethesda just called it Fallout. After all it's not really a sequel to Fallout 2; it lacks a lot of the fourth wall breaking antics as well as the over-saturated pop culture references. Maybe positioning it more as a reboot (which it half sort of was) would have adjusted expectations.

However I have to disagree that it's a terrible Fallout game. Fallout 2 is a terrible Fallout game. It had none of the mood or atmosphere that Fallout 1 had. Fallout 1 was tinged with melancholic nostalgia. Fallout 2 was over-stuffed with pop culture references and corny fourth wall breaking jokes while Fallout 1 was more concerned with black humour. When you do a side by side comparison Fallout 2 is a far greater departure from the Fallout "feel" than Fallout 3 was.

#16 Posted by Eviternal (197 posts) -

I hope they're on a new engine. Gamebryo and/or Skyrim's Creation Engine could feel very dated in the next game. I do feel they keep making progress with each Fallout/TES iteration though, so I'm keen to see Fallout 4 regardless.

#17 Edited by Tennmuerti (8174 posts) -

@humanity: I wouldn't ever call them great either. They only get to the good status for me (and that mostly applies only to NV), since i see reasons they can be fun outside of the Fallout or rpg trappings. In a similar way that I don't even consider Skyrim an rpg anymore, but still can dig the nordic feel, and good looking dragons.

#18 Posted by MildMolasses (3229 posts) -

So on the day that that hoax website's timer was set to end, documents leak saying the same things that the that hoax was implying. Are we really ready to go down this path again?

#19 Posted by SomeDeliCook (2341 posts) -

This thread title is very misleading

#20 Posted by CircleNine (380 posts) -

I for one can't wait to walk a largely nondescript wasteland dotted with nondescript caves and engine bugs where I or necessary NPCs fall through the world.

Or maybe it'll be more fun and less broken this time around.

Like that said, the revamped companion system of NV which allowed you to just talk your way through the game while your buddies handled the fighting was pretty great.

#21 Posted by AMyggen (3650 posts) -

I would be shocked if they don't move on to a new engine now. That shit began to look dated in Skyrim, and it's been a while. Anyways, looking forward to this!

#22 Edited by Tennmuerti (8174 posts) -

@oldirtybearon said:

@tennmuerti said:

@humanity said:

Always happy to lend a helping hand, with the caveat that I personally thought Fallout 3 and New Vegas were awful Fallout games and average RPG's.

Link: IGN - Fallout 4 is real!!!!!!!

That's pretty much exactly the same way I qualify F3. Terrible Fallout game, average rpg, good game.

Eerie ....

I wonder if this kind of response would be less frequent if Bethesda just called it Fallout. After all it's not really a sequel to Fallout 2; it lacks a lot of the fourth wall breaking antics as well as the over-saturated pop culture references. Maybe positioning it more as a reboot (which it half sort of was) would have adjusted expectations.

However I have to disagree that it's a terrible Fallout game. Fallout 2 is a terrible Fallout game. It had none of the mood or atmosphere that Fallout 1 had. Fallout 1 was tinged with melancholic nostalgia. Fallout 2 was over-stuffed with pop culture references and corny fourth wall breaking jokes while Fallout 1 was more concerned with black humour. When you do a side by side comparison Fallout 2 is a far greater departure from the Fallout "feel" than Fallout 3 was.

Most of the fourth wall breaking stuff in 2 was relegated to the random special events, not the main game, people keep forgetting. And Fallout 1 had plenty of it's own references. Fallout 2 still however kept the overall serious narrative, good rpg mechanics, internal world consistency, well done interwoven quests and dialogue . None of which can be said of F3. Fallout 2 also still had quite a bit of black humor left, which again none of is in F3, it's just pure dumbassery on every front.

#23 Posted by Rorie (2987 posts) -

This doesn't really add up - the idea of a pre-made main character is just isn't something that's ever existed in Fallout or any of the Bethsoft games, really. I can't see them having a pre-made character with a backstory and narrating the intro and all that stuff. Maybe this is just for a casting call, but that alone makes me think this might not be entirely legit.

Staff
#24 Posted by believer258 (12202 posts) -

I hope it uses id Tech 5.

I know it's not going to happen but I would be super excited for this is Bethesda was designing the world, id was doing the mechanics and gameplay, and someone else (like Obsidian) was writing the story.

#25 Posted by Humanity (10111 posts) -

@tennmuerti said:

@humanity said:

Always happy to lend a helping hand, with the caveat that I personally thought Fallout 3 and New Vegas were awful Fallout games and average RPG's.

Link: IGN - Fallout 4 is real!!!!!!!

That's pretty much exactly the same way I qualify F3. Terrible Fallout game, average rpg, good game.

Eerie ....

I wonder if this kind of response would be less frequent if Bethesda just called it Fallout. After all it's not really a sequel to Fallout 2; it lacks a lot of the fourth wall breaking antics as well as the over-saturated pop culture references. Maybe positioning it more as a reboot (which it half sort of was) would have adjusted expectations.

However I have to disagree that it's a terrible Fallout game. Fallout 2 is a terrible Fallout game. It had none of the mood or atmosphere that Fallout 1 had. Fallout 1 was tinged with melancholic nostalgia. Fallout 2 was over-stuffed with pop culture references and corny fourth wall breaking jokes while Fallout 1 was more concerned with black humour. When you do a side by side comparison Fallout 2 is a far greater departure from the Fallout "feel" than Fallout 3 was.

Dood what are you even saying? Fallout 2 was amazing. It was full of fun jokes, interesting locations and amazing writing. On top of all that there were plenty of great callbacks to the first game for fans of the series - Harold, Vault 13, Tandy in NCR etc. There was no departure as far as I'm concerned.

I'm not going to speak for @tennmuerti here but whether it's called Fallout 3 or Fallout makes no difference to me - that was not the issue I had with it. My issue was that the world was bland, the NPC's were like cardboard cutouts and most important of all the writing was extremely lackluster if not downright bad. Anytime the writing did perk up, it was ruined by poor game mechanics and completely lifeless environments, littered with repeating props and identical level-pieces. A large part of that game felt like it was made in the Bethesda TES, and not hand crafted by a large studio with level engineers and artists.

Of course those are just my personal opinions on it and I fully realize I'm in the minority here because tons of people really love Fallout 3, and that's great for them, just not a game for me Fallout or not.

#26 Edited by DukesT3 (1945 posts) -

Announcement E3 2015 with a 2017 fall release date.

It'll probably be a while.

#27 Posted by 2HeadedNinja (1776 posts) -

oc it's real ... did anyone ever doubt there would be a Fallout 4? ... even if this is a hoax, they still are working on that game.

#28 Posted by jimmyfenix (3753 posts) -

I LOVED fallout 3 !

#29 Edited by AngriGhandi (792 posts) -

@oldirtybearon: Yes! I hear so few people ever say this, but it's true.

I remember, even as a young person, playing Fallout 1 and Fallout 2 back to back and being struck by how digressive and silly Fallout 2 was in comparison to the first. ("Why do these two creepy celebrities have a spaceship? Is this going to be important to the endgame or something?")

Really, in a lot of ways, Fallout 3 is a just more tonally consistent remake of the "government remnants gradually become genocidal fascists" story material of Fallout 2.

I wouldn't go so far as to call Fallout 2 a terrible Fallout game myself-- but Fallout 3 is a pretty great Fallout game.

#30 Posted by ILikePopCans (775 posts) -

Yeah, not that excited because of course they making it. But Fallout 4 is the game I'm most excited for. Glad they are taking their time to make a full fledged sequel.

Bet it will come out early to fall 2015. E3 2014 announcement.

#31 Edited by ArtisanBreads (3997 posts) -

@jimmyfenix said:

I LOVED fallout 3 !

Me too.

Interested to see how they work Boston into it. I want a "Lincoln's Repeater" equivalent.

#32 Edited by Kaiserreich (741 posts) -
  • pre-made main character
  • voiced main character
  • set not long after the nuclear war

If this is all true I could not be more disinterested in this game.

#33 Posted by SomeDeliCook (2341 posts) -

Wouldn't be surprised if this is a red herring

#34 Posted by Humanity (10111 posts) -

@rorie said:

This doesn't really add up - the idea of a pre-made main character is just isn't something that's ever existed in Fallout or any of the Bethsoft games, really. I can't see them having a pre-made character with a backstory and narrating the intro and all that stuff. Maybe this is just for a casting call, but that alone makes me think this might not be entirely legit.

There were "pre-made" characters in Fallout (the 1997 release) and all it amounted to was a bit of flavor text on their background and pre-set stats. Maybe they are going in that direction.

Also to @oldirtybearon just wanna say - hey man I respect your opinion and don't really want to derail this thread about Fallout 4 with a huge debate concerning a game released in 1997. You have to excuse me, I know I started it, but I'm not that passionate about many games and since early childhood I was a huge fan of both Fallout and Fallout 2. Both those titles, and to a lesser degree Planescape Torment, made me instantly answer "RPGs!" when asked what my favorite type of game was. They were also one of the very few games that I bothered beating multiple times (something that I don't have the patience for and usually consider a waste of time) - fists only, being a pacifist, melee weapons, INT set to 1 and so forth. So whenever the topic of Fallout 3 and onwards pops up I always find myself lambasting these new releases for simply not being the childhood games that I fell in love with which is a shitty attitude to have.

So my bad, let the Fallout 4 conversation continue unabated from the cranky old man section in the bleachers.

#35 Posted by Oldirtybearon (4891 posts) -

@humanity: It's cool dude. I think I provoked the response by calling Fallout 2 terrible. It's not. I like Fallout 2, but I'm always puzzled by people who hold it up as the definition of the series when trying to put down Fallout 3. To me Fallout 3 is just far more consistent with the OG Fallout than Fallout 2.

So no worries, brah.

#36 Posted by TheMeat (64 posts) -
#37 Posted by Discoman (171 posts) -

@rorie said:

This doesn't really add up - the idea of a pre-made main character is just isn't something that's ever existed in Fallout or any of the Bethsoft games, really. I can't see them having a pre-made character with a backstory and narrating the intro and all that stuff. Maybe this is just for a casting call, but that alone makes me think this might not be entirely legit.

Agreed. Also the lack of branching dialogue trees means there wouldn't be SPECIAL or skill checks.

Then there's the fact that the opening monologue doesn't follow the traditional format of explaining what the situation is in the game. "War. War Never Changes" is also never repeated in the Intro. It's said by Perlman at the very beginning and that's it. I think this is another fake.

#38 Edited by Vuud (2035 posts) -

@discoman said:

Agreed. Also the lack of branching dialogue trees means there wouldn't be SPECIAL or skill checks.

Oh I sincerely doubt they are going to keep up the pretense of using SPECIAL. They'll probably keep going the Skyrim route and you'll only have 2 stats = "Shoot" and "Win". The Shoot stat for combat, Win for everything else.