Much as I promised, today we're going to fully swallow and comprehend exactly what was implied when Obsidian gave their ominous "I dunno" to the question of whether or not Bethesda's recent acquisition opened the door for Fallout New Vegas 2, but first let's go over why this is important. Fallout, originally created by Black Isle Studios, was a decent, if slightly messy, Post-apocalyptic spiritual successor to Wasteland. When Bethesda got ahold of the the franchise they popularised it by bringing it to the 3d space in an, up until then, unparalleled 3D open world that pushed forward what RPG games could be. They struck a lot of fame with their game and Bethesda became synonymous with the franchise with one lucky entry. After that, however, the remnants of BIS, now Obsidian, got a chance to come back to the Fallout franchise and provide their own take with Fallout New Vegas. New Vegas completely redefined everything that Bethesda had laid and proved to become the best Fallout title to date, which it still is. Unfortunately, similar gameplay made it feel to some as though this was just a 'expansion' upon what Bethesda built, limiting the game's critical success. But as time has gone on fondness has grown and now, with Bethesda's recent floundering of the franchise, most recognise New Vegas as the peak of the franchise.
That's what makes it such a bummer that we weren't going to get another Obsidian Fallout game because of stupid semantics. What semantics? Well the overall Metacritic score for New Vegas was a few points below the required fresh hold for a bonus, and whilst that in itself is not some sort of 'ground zero' for bad blood like some like to argue it was, (The deal was to hit this overall review point which they didn't hit, professionalism would dictate no feelings were hurt here and no promises were broken) this would certainly be an excuse for Zenimax not to place the franchise back in their hands again. "They didn't excel like we wanted them too, so why trust them with that opportunity again?". Obsidian certainly didn't let it get to them, as they moved on to their own games and making their own reputation, even going so far as to revive Wasteland in two great games. But for us fans there was always that nagging longing for New Vegas style action that Bethesda was just plain ill-equipped to satiate, and until recently things would have stayed that way in perpetuity.
But what was it that made New Vegas so good? And what is missing from today's Fallout which it could desperately use some Obsidian magic? Well that really depends on who you ask but for me, it was the focus on a post-apocalyptic society, rather than a just a post-apocalyptic world. What I mean by that is Fallout 3 and 4 did a great job of portraying a world that had fallen in the wake of the bombs, but whenever it came to realising the society that grew out of that carnage, they always seemed to fall short. Rivet City and Megaton where probably the best iterations of this during their tenure with the franchise, but Fallout 4's Diamond City felt passionless and without purpose. It's hard to quite explain, but when you play New Vegas and look at the world which has spawned out of the Mojave wasteland it all just makes sense. You have tourist towns that have become consumed by Cowboy law, roving bands of drug addicts of the outskirts of the city and gangs popping up in the slums around the Strip. You even have whole weird societies popping up in the casino families wherein the exaggeration of image becomes a backbone for their way of life. Vegas just felt like more of a world that was real, whereas Bethesda's Fallout, whilst still being unique, sometimes fell a little flat.
Now of course, what makes those worlds work so well are the people who inhabit them, and from there it really becomes a matter of opinion for what you prefer. Obsidian tend to lean towards writing side characters with some sort of driving force to them, whereas Bethesda seem to aim towards folk who just fit into their environment and are happy to do so. I personally relate more to the former and thus that's what I respond more to when I see it in my Fallout. This goes doubly true with the way the two developers handled Companions and the way they work in Fallout games. New Vegas boasted a cast of unforgettable misfits whilst Fallout 4 had a group of likeable characters, but most of whom didn't really progress as characters by the end. (Character progression was something Obsidian prioritised when they made their companions.) Maybe you see Bethesda's method for NPC creation as superior, it really comes down to personal preference, but for me no Fallout title has come close to that feeling of twisted authenticity that I felt in the whacky world of New Vegas.
I, and every other Fallout fan who's grown tired of getting fed these rotten scraps, hanker at the chance to present this flagging franchise back to those who did it a good turn so long ago, but maybe the real question at this point would be if Obsidian themselves are even willing to take the games back. Remember that the response from them so far was one of distinct non-committal, they didn't even say that they would if they had the chance, and why would they? Obsidian have their Wasteland games which are critical darlings, and are hard at work on The Outer Worlds, which I'm fairly certain they're working to make a franchise, as well as Avowed, which is an entirely new property that needs their attention. (And that's not to mention 'Grounded' and the small team working on that.) What I'm trying to say if that Obsidian have their hands firmly full right now, so even if Microsoft wrenched the Fallout licence from Bethesda's cold hands and presented it to Obsidian on a gold-plated platter, we may not get the answer we are hoping for.
But just imagine if we did. Obsidian in the size that they are at now, with the resources they have now, and the backing of Mircrosoft, could make the ultimate Fallout game to end all other Fallout games. It probably wouldn't be the biggest, (Afterall Fallout 76's Appalachia is almost too big as it is) but I could guarantee it would be the most detailed with enough great characters, choice-consequence, memorable side quests, worthwhile collectibles, ponderous themes, badass new factions and tongue in cheek humour to transport as all to the land of Fallout's nuked America for a good long while. It might even be enough to reignite the modding community, who never seemed to settle to Fallout 4 too strongly, as being in a world brimming with creative ingenuity tends to rub off on people. And of course I don't intend to leave Bethesda potless, they have their Elder Scrolls games as well as Starfield, (Which I hope ends up looking a lot better than that leaked Screenshot made it seem) and as far as I'm concerned, the more time they have to invest on those properties the better; give Obsidian back their Fallout.
Now of course, I'm purposefully whittling all these complex matters of licenses and franchise ownership down because it make for the most fun discussion, but it should likely be pointed out that, no; Obsidian will never own the Fallout property again. The most we can hope for is a partnership similar to the one which birthed New Vegas for us all, but given how timeless that title has proven to be perhaps that's not such a bad thing afterall. So let me say it now and risk this ageing terribly; the future of Fallout is cast in Obsidian, and I want it no other way. (Pretty please, Microsoft. I'm beggin' here...)
No comments:
Post a Comment