Fallout 4 could be set in Boston: rumour

Is there anything in the lore about Boston or that area of the country?

I hope they mix up the environment a little bit more in 4.
 
MOnk said:
Is there anything in the lore about Boston or that area of the country?

I hope they mix up the environment a little bit more in 4.
Click to expand...

While I dont think there is anything in the cannon about Boston yet that might make for a brilliant setting, with the Legion in Arizona, the NCR in California and the BoS in the Capital using Boston would be epic, I also wouldn't mind seeing the Fallout Universes version of New York, although I agree we need a bit of variation and I would like to see a game world where it doesn't look like the apocalypse happened yesterday. Like Freeside in New Vegas where the burnt out cars litter the streets and more than 100 years after the great war people still haven't tried cleaning up or rebuilding. I loved that about F2 and the Hub, felt like a natural progression. In that respect F3 and much of NV felt like a step back. I guess in F3 and NV they basically had to reintroduce the entire Fallout Universe so making it too civilised would have had people going "I thought this game was suppose to be about post nuclear war". To that extent I wouldn't mind seeing a Fallout game set earlier than F3 or NV.
 
Yeah that is one thing that got me about FO3 (at least FNV had a sense of being rebuilt and a reintroduction of technology). It's 100years after the nukes, during that entire time being have been around and living outside yet in FO3 not a single person tried to actually make a brick, chop some trees or build a house (shacks don't count). The lack of vegetation was also rather unrealistic and the whole 'reclaimed by nature' theme seems more along the lines of what would happen.

Like you said that is one thing the original Fallouts got right, you had these little pockets of civilization in largely uncivilized world which made the contrast all that more interesting.
 
MOnk said:
Yeah that is one thing that got me about FO3 (at least FNV had a sense of being rebuilt and a reintroduction of technology). It's 100years after the nukes, during that entire time being have been around and living outside yet in FO3 not a single person tried to actually make a brick, chop some trees or build a house (shacks don't count). The lack of vegetation was also rather unrealistic and the whole 'reclaimed by nature' theme seems more along the lines of what would happen.

Like you said that is one thing the original Fallouts got right, you had these little pockets of civilization in largely uncivilized world which made the contrast all that more interesting.
Click to expand...

Or pick op some of the pre-war crap that is lying around.

Even in FNV the inside of the hotels didn't mesh well, burnt books etc, busted up shit lying around. Surely people could clean up, use the junk not display it.

Avatar said:
It'll be pretty interesting in Boston. I wonder if they'll use the Skyrim engine...
Click to expand...

I think they will, F3 & NV ran on a heavily modified Oblivion Engine so its only natural to assume they would use the Skyrim engine for a new fallout. I doubt they would build a new engine for it, even though Fallout really needs its own engine.
 
Bethesda needs a new engine, nevermind just Fallout. :) As cringe worthly as some of tech glitchies in Rage were, Bethesda really need to get some of that id talent consulting on their engines.
 
OmegaFenix said:
I think they will, F3 & NV ran on a heavily modified Oblivion Engine so its only natural to assume they would use the Skyrim engine for a new fallout. I doubt they would build a new engine for it, even though Fallout really needs its own engine.
Click to expand...

This is exactly why I'm wondering. If ever there was an IP that deserved its own engine, it's Fallout..
 
Yeah, the Skyrim engine wasn't exactly a huge leap from that used in Oblivion, they just kinda turned everything up a notch. And the safe bet is that Fallout4 will be using the same.
 
MOnk said:
Bethesda needs a new engine, nevermind just Fallout. :) As cringe worthly as some of tech glitchies in Rage were, Bethesda really need to get some of that id talent consulting on their engines.
Click to expand...

Yeah, even Skyrim's was not nearly up to scratch with what a big sandbox needs.

Graal said:
You mean Gamebryo 1.5? Skyrim runs on a modified version of the engine that powered the previous Elder Scrolls and Fallout games.
Click to expand...

Strange I seem to remember the engine being called "Creation" or "the Creation engine" which is a band new engine that has only been used in Skyrim. Fallout 3 and New Vegas used the heavily modified version of Gamebryo. As far as I know Gamebryo & Creation share some of the same base architecture but was otherwise built from the ground up.
 
They said it was new but anyone can see it's not as new as they say as it exhibits almost every quirk and bug of the previous engines.
 
MOnk said:
They said it was new but anyone can see it's not as new as they say as it exhibits almost every quirk and bug of the previous engines.
Click to expand...

Also true, it looked slightly better, especially the characters, but yeah. I think alot of the bugs where as a result of the engine being "new".

But like you said there is huge place for improvement so I will be curious to see if the F4 rumour turns out to be true what it will look & play like.
 
I just hope they fix the bugs / crashes. While playing Fallout 3 & NV, I had my finger on the quick save button the whole time, using it multiple times a minute. While the game is great, I think it has been the most unstable game I've played so far.
 
ViperGTI said:
I just hope they fix the bugs / crashes. While playing Fallout 3 & NV, I had my finger on the quick save button the whole time, using it multiple times a minute. While the game is great, I think it has been the most unstable game I've played so far.
Click to expand...

True, I hated F3 on pc. It was much more stable on Xbox. NV on the other hand tends to crash about 2 or 3 times a session. :/
 
The problems with FO3 and FNV can be tied back simply to the age of the engine and the fact that it was never designed to work with multi-core CPU's and sort of got jerry-rigged, which as so happens, didn't work out so well.
 
NV has the annoying habit of freezing, even with all the updates on the Xbox, it will still just freeze. I am hoping this time around we will get to see a city that's starting to look better, similar to how Shady Sands started to progress with change, also I'd like to see more crumbled buildings, considering it's actually been 200 years since the bombs fell.
 
Lupus said:
NV has the annoying habit of freezing, even with all the updates on the Xbox, it will still just freeze. I am hoping this time around we will get to see a city that's starting to look better, similar to how Shady Sands started to progress with change, also I'd like to see more crumbled buildings, considering it's actually been 200 years since the bombs fell.
Click to expand...

If I was the producer/ Lead Designer I would actually start a new Trilogy, set the first one some time, 50 - 100 years after the bombs fell. Thought the 3 games I would change the setting slightly, naturally, depending on the choice the player made. Like how in Fallout 1 the player has a quest to save Tandi, in Fallout 2 she is President of the NCR but the player could fail the quest in F1 without it affecting F2's cannon. I think that has some potential. Kind of what Mass Effect did with story except I would mould it into the environment(s).
 
OmegaFenix said:
Strange I seem to remember the engine being called "Creation" or "the Creation engine" which is a band new engine that has only been used in Skyrim. Fallout 3 and New Vegas used the heavily modified version of Gamebryo. As far as I know Gamebryo & Creation share some of the same base architecture but was otherwise built from the ground up.
Click to expand...

Gamebryo 1.5 was me being sarcastic. Creation was really nothing more than a souped up Gamebryo engine. And it only just managed to not suck as much as the Gamebryo engine itself.

What angered me most is that Bethesda claimed Skyrim was going to run on a brand new engine, yet when everyone started playing they immediately recognised Gamebryo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top