70°

The Top 5 Games we want to see on the Xbox 720 - onPause

onPause writes:

On May 21st the Xbox ‘Durango’, ’720′, ‘Infinity’ or whatever the name will be, is going to be shown to the world and with it some of the next generation games. Of course we know that Activision and Infinity ward will be showing Call of Duty Ghosts for the first time but not much else.

Speed-Racer4007d ago

Thoroughly enjoyed the DiRT series. Hoping it makes an appearance.

mcroddi4007d ago

This is quite a good list I think and man, yes I want to see a new DiRT!

brandonw004007d ago

I want another Destroy All Humans!

WeAreLegion4007d ago

Good stuff. I REALLY want a Crackdown 3, done right. 2 was a bit of a letdown. :/

Max-Zorin4006d ago

I wanna see Lost Odyssey 2.

Show all comments (7)
140°

Bethesda Needs to Reduce the Gaps Between New Fallout and Elder Scrolls Releases

Waiting a decade for new instalments in franchises as massive as Fallout and Elder Scrolls feels like a waste.

Read Full Story >>
gamingbolt.com
-Foxtrot8h ago

Microsoft have Obsidian but I feel it's Bethesda who just don't want to play ball as they've always said they want to do it themselves.

Once MS bought Zenimax in 2020 they should have put the Outer Worlds 2 on the back burner, allow Bethesda to finish off its own Space RPG with Starfield (despite totally different tone why have two in your first party portfolio with two developers who's gameplay is a tad similar) and got Obsidian for one of their projects to make a spiritual successor to New Vegas.

When the Elder Scrolls VI is finished Bethesda can then onto the main numbered Fallout 5 themselves.

The Outer Worlds 2 started development in 2019 so putting it on the back burner wouldn't have been the end of the world, they'd have always come back to it once Fallout was done and it would have been nicely spaced out from Starfields release once they had most likely stopped supporting it and all the expansions were released.

If they did this back in 2020 when they bought Zenimax and the game had a good, steady 4 - 5 years development, you might have seen it release in 2025.

We are literally going to be waiting until 2030 at the very earliest for Fallout 5 and all they seem bothered about is pushing Fallout 76.

RaidenBlack6h ago(Edited 6h ago)

Its not just only Todd not playing ball.
Obsidian have made a name for themselves in delivering stellar RPGs, but most famous once have always been sequels/spin-offs to borrowed IPs like KOTOR 2, Neverwinter Nights 2, Fallout: New Vegas, Stick of Truth etc.
Obsidian wants to invest more in their own original IPs like Outer Worlds or Pillars of Eternity with Avowed.
Similar to what Bluepoint & inXile wants to do or Kojima is doing (i.e not involving anymore in Konami's IPs).
So yea, even if New Vegas has the most votes from 3D Fallout fans, Obsidian just wants to do their own thing, like any aspiring dev studio and MS is likely currently respecting that.
But a future Fallout game from Obsidian will surely happen. Founder Feargus Urquhart has already stated an year ago that they're eager to make a new Fallout game with Bethesda, New Vegas 2 or otherwise. Urquhart was the director of the very first 1995's Fallout game after all.
And don't forget Brian Fargo and his studio inXile, as Brian Fargo was the director of Fallout's 1988 predecessor: Wasteland

KyRo3h ago(Edited 3h ago)

Obsidian should take over the FO IP. They're do far better with it than Bethesda who hasn't made a great game for almost 15 years

Duke192h ago(Edited 2h ago)

I disagree. Part of these games is the support for the mod community. If they move to releasing a "next game" every 2 or 3 years, the modding support plummets and the franchises turn into just another run of the mill RPG.

Make the games good enough to withstand the test of time, to keep people coming back to them and expanding on them with mod support.

--Onilink--21m ago(Edited 20m ago)

I dont think anyone is saying they need to come out every 2 years (not to mention almost no game is released that quickly anymore)

By the time Fallout 5 comes out, it will be more than 15 years since Fallout 4 came out (same with ES6 coming out 15 years after Skyrim). Even if you want to use F76 as the metric for the most recent release, that one came out in 2018. It will be a miracle if F5 comes out before 2030

The point is that for a studio that doesnt seem to operate with multiple teams doing several projects at once, that their projects normally take 4-5 years as a minimum, and that now they even added Starfield to the rotation, it becomes a 15+ years waiting period between releases for each series, which doesnt make sense. Imagine that Nintendo only released a mainline Mario or Zelda game every 15 years…

They either need to start developing more than 1 project at a time, let someone else take a crack at one of the IPs or significantly reduce their development times

mandf18m ago

Yeah I’m going to say it, who cares about the modding community when making a game? Half the time developers only tolerate modders because they fix there game for them.

Skuletor1h ago

Yeah, let's all advocate for smaller gaps between series' releases, then we'll probably get headlines about how the series have dropped in quality and they could have benefited from more time in the oven. Let them cook.

SimpleSlave48m ago

"how the series have dropped in quality and they could have benefited from more time in the oven" So every Bethesda game then? Got it.

Listen, I would agree if this was about From Software or something, but Bethesda?

🤣

C'mon now. What timeline are you from?

isarai58m ago

Hows about you focus on quality, just a thought 🤷‍♂️

Sciurus_vulgaris9m ago

Bethesda [or Microsoft] would have to reallocate internal and external studios towards fallout and elder scrolls titles. Bethesda has the issue of developing 2 big IPs that are large RPGs on rotation. If you want more Fallout and Elder Scrolls, development will have to be outsourced.

Show all comments (11)
150°

GTA 5’s cut “James Bond Trevor” DLC was already part-shot, actor says

The GTA 5 Agent Trevor DLC episode could have been a real treat for fans on PlayStation and Xbox, before it was scrubbed sometime before 2017.

Read Full Story >>
theloadout.com
Killer2020UK12h ago

More interested in money than giving fans what they want. Such a shame

CrimsonWing6912h ago

With the amount of money they generated, I just don’t understand the scrubbing of this. It would’ve been fantastic for fans.

Profchaos10h ago

I really want to know who drove the decision to focus on multiplayer was it Rockstar or take two.

Because when online started taking off many of the studio leads began having falling outs and leading including a founder

andy859h ago

This makes me sad. Trevor was one of my favourite characters in gaming

280°

Fallout 4 – Why Was it So Divisive?

The RPG has seen an explosion in popularity thanks to Amazon's TV show, but it was Bethesda's most controversial Fallout for a long time.

Read Full Story >>
gamingbolt.com
thorstein1d 9h ago

I loved it. And I platinum'd it. I guess it's like most "divisive" games. If you don't like it, so what? Let those that do, enjoy it.

Eonjay1d 2h ago (Edited 1d 2h ago )

The article is trying to create fud where there was none. It has an 87 meta (on PS4). There is nothing divisive about it. It was well received. Period. I don't remember any arguments except for some performance issues when it first came out. Thats it.

VenomUK23h ago

I really enjoyed Fallout 4.
I loved the halfway goal of what you are building towards. I had a good sense of what it was and then when you finally are almost there the music builds up - beautiful!

@Eonjay Forget the meta scores there are plenty of people who loved Fallout 3 but thought Fallout 4 was a bit of anticlimax and I do get it. Pete Hines the retired head of Bethesda's PR was even asked about it, and his answer was that it was because it simply didn't have the novelty of being brand new that Fallout 3 had.

Profchaos15h ago

No venture beyond that so many of the hardcore gatekeep the franchise hard as 4 was far more popular and simplified many of the rpg elements refined shooting to the point where vats was optional the game was far more accessible and sold the most out of every franchise entry to date.

It's my personal favourite I get why people love 3 or NV but I do hate seeing people crap on 4 and the people who like it.

neutralgamer19928h ago

It was a good shooter especially coming from FO3/NV game wise improvements wise but it was a below average RPG and that’s where many felt ROG elements should have been deeper

CantThinkOfAUsername1d 5h ago

Whatever they do, Fallout 5 is guaranteed to be dogsh*t.

GamerRN21h ago

What are you basing that off of?

CantThinkOfAUsername9h ago

- Fallout 4's story, characters, dialogue, and quests. They even managed to make the Vaults boring.
- Fallout 76 is Fallout 4 online. Same crap.
- Starfield doubled down on the crappiness of all these aspects despite being a new IP.

People bought and liked all of these games, which sends the message that we want more of this. I don't know about you, but I don't like being treated as a child and my intelligence insulted by developers.

ChasterMies1d 5h ago

Fallout 4 wasn’t so much divisive as not very good. But there aren’t many first person RPGs so what else are fans of the genre supposed to play?

FPS_D3TH1d 5h ago (Edited 1d 5h ago )

I think it was the lack of morality gameplay and lack of path to completion options compared to what fallout 3 and New Vegas offered. I think the issue mostly arose because of the voiced protagonist and how many lines of dialogue that needed to be recorded. Didn’t leave for many options beyond “good” “sarcastic douche” and the odd question or two for nearly every interaction. Personally I thought the game was fantastic as an adventure and exploration game, I liked the park system and base building, but the rpg aspects were fairly gutted. It made shooting much more tolerable too but it still wasn’t anything fantastic. The faction choices were ok and I felt like they all provided a more grey moral choice dilemma compared to older games which felt more good/evil but it wasn’t presented as such as prominently as I would’ve liked. You had to do some more internal and critical thinking of your own to come to decide why you’d support one faction over another unless you were in it just for some in game benefit or another.

kneon19h ago

I didn't like any of the factions, so when it got to the point that I had to choose, I chose to stop playing

jznrpg18h ago(Edited 18h ago)

I finished the game but you are correct. I was thinking I don’t really know which one to pick as I don’t really care for any of them. I was near the Institute so I just went with that quest line. A lame way to choose who will win but I didn’t really prefer one over the others

EazyC12h ago

I don't think FNV was good/evil. You have evil with Caesar's Legion, then everything else is different shades of grey imo and quite relative to your own political views! 😅

Friendlygamer1d 5h ago (Edited 1d 5h ago )

1 Bad writing, the main quest is terrible. The sense of urgency of the story is at odds with the open world nature of the game

2 Boring, bland factions

3 too much personality for the main character. The game decides that you're married, that you love your son, your voice... a rpg like fallout should have a blank slate mc

4 dead open world. Fallout 3 and nv have a bunch of small cities and locations on their maps that give you interesting quests and dialogue. In Fallout 4 it feels like 80 per cent of the map is focused on combat and environmental storytelling, it feels more like a post apocalyptic action game rather than a dialogue heavy rpg

Fallout 4 is a very fun open world fps with really cool environmental storytelling but a very poor rpg

Show all comments (53)