Website source code matches with E3 listing.
As long as it don't hold current gen back I'm ok with it. I've never played the previous Fallout game. Everyone seems very excited for Fallout 2 so maybe I should give this one a try.
Fallout 2 came out in 98. Last gen will hold back a current-gen/PC release.
He is a few years behind!
Well the only way to truly make that happen is by having the 360/ps3 version developed by a completely separate studio, otherwise by nature of even thinking about how "this" or "that" will look or work on 360/ps3 and providing resources to such process the game on next gen platforms is essentially being held back. That said, I personally just want dev's to let go of last gen hardware, those are old systems with a huge library of games to play, at this point in their life cycle if you want new games dev'd in 2015 and beyond then invest in new hardware.
@4Sh0w Yeah, sort of like Forza Horizon 2. I just don't see them going that route though. And I mentioned below, Bethesda and PS3 do not mix.
dumahim, Agreed, obviously because in most cases it a lot more expensive project, essentially you would be paying 2 entirely separate studios to make (nearly) the same game.
4Sh0w, even in that case, the overall design will still have to worry about mechanics that the 10 year old machines can still run. It is innevitable. It if is cross gen, it is not current gen, and a lot of consequences come from this.
If they use the same damn engine they used for Fallout 3/NV/Skyrim I'll be pissed. They need to step up their game. I just don't see how a true current gen experience could possibly have any hope at running well on ps3/360 as their other games barely ran well. It would have to be massively downgraded.
Palitera, yes you are correct if in fact the next gen game is being co-developed with the last gen game or in a situation where the studio make the last gen game are sort of porting the game but need a lot of support from the main studio. What I am suggesting is that as long as the development of the main game is built entirely from the ground up for next gen hardware without concern or allocating any of the major studios resources to the last gen game then there really is no affect on the main game. To illustrate what I'm saying here lets say CDPR let another studio now or they themselves begin porting Witcher3 to last gen hardware= Of course it can be done, almost any game can but it would have to be scaled back drastically, lacking much of the content and features of the current game, it however will still be a limited version of Witcher3 on 360/ps3 and obviously since the current Witcher3 was made to take advantage of the latest hardware there would be no real impact on the current game. -The only reason why this isn't the best solution going forward is because its expensive to do, plus not many studios have the discipline to truly hand over the creation of their ambitious project to see a scaled back shadow of their game on lesser hardware and finally the message from devs at some point has to be that they are focused on moving forward, get new hardware or play our old games on your old system.
Completely agree. Just PS4, X1, and PC
bad move, they should take the route the witcher 3 did. pc, ps4 and xbox one only. yes games cost a lot of money to make and yes there are 160 million systems out there you will ignore but if you want people to move on and buy new hardware you need to put all your efforts on the newer hardware.
He must have been locked in a vault.
It's a flop if it's last gen also. I was never excited for a new fallout game anyway. Dark Souls 3 FTW!
If it's cross-gen, then it will inevitably hold current-gen back, in one way or another. The only thing that being cross-gen allows the developers/publishers to do is throw more money at the project because they're hitting a larger audience, but that doesn't change the fact that last-gen is severely outdated.
Didn't seem to hold back Forza Horizon 2. Playing it on 360 was like playing a completely different game!
It would have to be created by two different teams. If its all in house then i will probably be skipping it if thats true. Its time to leave last gen behind. Its been 10 damn years.
@immorals Oh stop it FH2 was held back by the 360, they had to make sure not to implement mechanics, functions and options that the 360 couldn't handle. Sure the xb1 had cloud AI but beyond that it was just a visually better version of the same game. Trust me if MS ditched the 360 version of the game it probably would have been even more expansive with more content and functions.
Yeah you right man cuz ps3 caused witcher 3 to run 30fps and under on ps4, they shouldn't have made witcher 3 on ps3, we could of had a better game performing better
@stefan771, this generation isn't holding itself back... people that think that every game should be consistent with PC Ultra settings for a <=$400 price tag are misguided. @Shineon, this also has to do with my response about people's expectations of console games that are also developed for PC. It's about finding a balance; CDPR didn't develop The Witcher 3 for PS3/X360 because the game wouldn't have been technically possible on either of those consoles. They also didn't develop it solely for PC because they wouldn't have gotten enough funding to make the game they wanted to make. So, in all likelihood, they compromised and developed the game for both PS4 and Xbox One, along with PC. This way, a larger audience gets to experience the game on a cheaper budget, while people on PC still get to experience a visually breathtaking game. That isn't to say that the game doesn't look good on PS4 and Xbox One, which I think it does, but to say it looks worse than its PC counterpart is like saying that the sky is blue... it's stating the obvious. It's also played out and boring.
Yay, guys it's not Cross-Gen!!! https://www.youtube.com/wat...
Edit: My bad meant to reply above but as I said above its possible to get the most out of a next gen cross platform game but only if its built from the ground up for next gen hardware with a completely separate 360/ps3 dev studio trying to "mimic" what the devs are creating for X1/ps4.
it will hold current gen back. also Fallout 3 was the worst PS3 port ever and they want to make Fallout 4 a more ambitious game on PS3 ? holy shit i can't wait to see PS3 running Fallout 4.
I meant Fallout 4. I always have a typo thanks to mobile. Lol
Mhmm. Sure you did buddy. Sure.
What's wrong with everyone? Someone makes a simple mistake and you get nearly 100 disagrees. I forgot everyone's perfect.
Dont worry im with you ^-^
Sure.. Sure.. Predictive text always changes 4 to 2.../s
Sure.. Sure.. Predictive text always changes 4 to 2.../s I'm not saying it was autocorrected I'm saying I obviously hit the 2 instead of the 4. Small keyboard and typing fast doesn't always work out.
It will be held back. Many concepts and technology elements will get overlooked since they can't be done on older hardware due to lack of processing and memory to maintain them along with the desired quality/performance of the game itself. I'm guessing we'll be seeing Fallout 3.5 more than anything else.
I think this is more related to the game's development cycle. Fallout 4 is most likely in development for years and it seems like lifting all that technology to the new console cycle might have proven to be difficult.
@Rashid: If the game is releasing in 2016, which I'm guessing it will, then I'm not sure that really is the case. That's 3 years of next generation know-how in a 4 year development cycle where the first year involves primarily core engine development and design/graphic planning than actual content creation/coding. I will say, though, that this is Bethesda. They really aren't known for programming if I'm being honest, so I can see how making comparisons of their level of programming and speed of programming probably is not equivalent to those of other companies who have made the leap recently. Don't get me wrong, Bethesda makes some good games. But, they also have some of the worst cases of bugs, let alone ones that have persisted across three generations of gaming, and have a remarkably slow development process when done in-house.
Chris, I want to beleive that they have listened to all that feedback during the years after Skyrim and F3 and hired more talented people... and yes this is Bethesda we are talking about here, lets not be quick to forget what great games they've given us so far. That said, a completly new engine for F4 and the new elder scrolls is a must, a current gen focused one. We dont know how long this game is in development and with what engine, but I have faith Bethesda will deliver in the visual department as they always do (game play and story needs no mention, its bethesda) what remains to be seen how optimised this one will be and now that consoles are essentially PCs I'm sure we wont be dissapointed, untill 3-4 patches later that is as its the new standard nowadays.
Sorry but last gen needs to go. Unless they have tailor made specific last gen version. Which won't be as bad. But I still believe all resources needs to point to current gen.
Several publishers are using separate studios to handle last-gen ports.. so let's hope they focus on current-gen and hand off the responsibility of downgrading their game to someone else.
No way in HELL could this also be last gen and what DUDE? Yes everyone would be pissed and Bethesda would suffer. No way I'd wanna kill or at least Hulk smash if that happened.
I'm sorry guys, but I can't agree with most of you. If you want studios and publishers to do well, to do their best financially so they don't have to lay off and close dev studios, then they almost have to make their games cross generational. There's a huge difference between 35 million consoles (8th gen) and 170 million consloles (7th gen).
These arguments are based on the assumption that the game was designed in such a way that would take advantage of newer hardware, and not hardware that is older. It also assumes that parts of games are scrapped because they don't work on the older hardware, when usually the older hardware just gets dumbed down versions of the same implementation.
The thing is, we all know it WILL hold back current-gen/PC versions. The games core has to be built around the lowest common denominator. A weaker core is still weak no matter how much makeup you put on it.
A half GB RAM console holding back a modern open world game? Whaaat? Nooooooo. lol
Please please please only be next gen and pc. If you really want to release it on ps3 and xbox360 than have another studio the care of last gen versions I seriously doubt this though. Because they were having issues last gen so o think they are more than happy to go next gen
Time travel confirmed
No please no:/
I doubt it will be on PS3/360 those are so old now.
I'm with you and I don't mean it because of the graphics like most around here. I wan't more possibilities! More sandbox! Only possible on next-gen hardware.
Nice to see company's still support the old (last) gen
How is that a good thing? It keeps the medium from Progressing.
He was either saying it to get a rise outta people or hes a cheapskate.
Progressing how? Better graphics is all I've seen from current-gen exclusives, and I can do without a focus on graphics. AI is still just as dumb as ever, if not moreso than previous gens (FEAR still blows most games away). Nothing really has been pushed forward other than polygons. Hell, just compare Fallout 2 to its successors to see that we've mostly regressed outside of graphics.
Err, consoles keep the medium from progressing. CDPR seem to be the only developer that will say this out loud. Oh that's right, because they're not in bed with Sony or MS, nor owned by scum like EA or Ubisoft, being paid to spout positive crap about the new consoles.
@Dynasty2021 Apparently you didn't actually read what CDPR said. They said, The Witcher 3 wouldn't be the same game scale wise, content wise, without consoles. Do consoles in general hold back the medium? Yes and no. Without console sales, people wouldn't be able to make games with the budgets they have. Now, if every console gamer became a PC gamer, then you wouldn't have that problem. But, consoles have benefits over PCs (just like PCs has benefits over consoles), and that will never happen.
no. not nice. it seriously affects games! like destiny! bungie needs to drop last gen support and that game will be so much better for it
Edit: Damm, did it again, meant to reply to DirtyPimp below. No, that's the cost of waiting...you buy a console dirt cheap, you got a ton of great games to play but you aren't necessarily entitled to new games being developed in 2015 and beyond, that's exactly why NEW HARDWARE is made to progress the industry and do more with the medium, not stagnate to let those who chose to wait forever hold progress back so "the lil kiddies can play too". Excuse my tone, but that's just how I feel.
Could you give examples of how it affects games?
@rainslacker http://www.technobuffalo.co... Here is one example and that's just a little thing. It also effected the size of the maps and player count etc.
The last generation lasted way too long, and held back developers for for far too long as is. This would not be a good thing. I like the idea of dropping $300 - 500 on a box that could last you a decade. That's awesome from a consumer standpoint. But, at the end of the day, it's at the expense of what is otherwise a rapidly evolving medium. @dirty So now all those people who bought a shiny new PC/PS4/One - the same who have been supporting new titles and the advancements the industry has been making - now have to be held back by those who waited a decade to grab one of the last gen consoles? Yeah. . . that's logical.
I agree, some folks just bought a ps3 and want to play the game too and i think its funny how people are acting like its such a huge deal, you enjoyed fallout 3 on ps3 xbox didnt ya? Let the folks who bought a ps3 do the same.
Then people with X1/PS4 have to deal with dumbed down gameplay elements. The 360/PS3 are a decade old now, just let them die peacefully
We should still put movies on VHS while we are at it, too.
If you just bot a ps3/Xbox 360. Then your not a true gamer, and your holding gamers back.
No, it's very bad to see.
nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo . why you never learn, greedy bastards
I was really really hyped for F4, but if this is true, my hype levels will immediately and violently fall to almost nil. Bethesda are really going to piss me off...
so true. We have been waiting for Fallout for years... It needs to be the best it can be. Not gimped because of old tech. In the words of Angry Joe... "Besthesda... if this is true... then you done fu3ked it up!" sigh...
Can't be true
Boooo. Gotta break from the old gen sometime, this would really suck for PS4/Xbone if true.
And for PC
True, guess I could have listed PC as well. PC does have the benefit of modding down the line though/people have definitely done cool things with the fallout games on PC. Consoles - we really just have to hope they do it right the first time.
Noooooo! Just move on already!
I hope this is not true either.
Keep last gen away. The Witcher has shown me what current gen can do, can't go back after that.