Here’s Why Fallout 4 Was Announced So Close to its Release; The World Will Be “Really Huge”

Before Fallout 4 was officially unveiled, many thought it would come in 2016. Most developers unveil the game one or even two years before launch. but Bethesda dropped on us a 2015 release date (on November 10th to be precise).

VP of Marketing Pete Hines told us the philosophy behind an announcement so close to the game’s launch.

Read Full Story >>
-Foxtrot3234d ago (Edited 3234d ago )

Every developer with a huge, established franchise, should be doing this

If they are Holiday games and come out in October - November then announcing it at E3 would be perfect

Most big franchises like Halo, Uncharted, GTA, Final Fantasy, MGS, Smash Bros, Mario Kart and Elder Scrolls for example are so big fans are always waiting for the next instalment so why not just use that anticipation to their advantage and announcing them 4-5 months before the release.

You announce it at E3

You show more off at Gamescom or TGS

Maybe a little more if you have your own event like PSX

Then it's built up enough hype to sell the game without raising peoples expectations so much the game won't meet them.

Abriael3234d ago

I agree with huge franchises. It's hard to ask the same with new IPs and smaller ones tho.

_-EDMIX-_3233d ago

Agreed. That is easier said then done and many seem to disregard that its an established IP using the same engine as its previous versions.

Other much more complicated games must be announced prior as to actually get fan reaction and support behind such ambitious projects. Many companies can't just be spending millions upon millions blindly not knowing if their concept is a hit or miss.

Fallout is established and using the same engine as its last versions.

They can very much do that, other IPs sorta can't.

They still need to market and they still need to gauge fan reaction. Fallout 4 is an easy buy for me as its for most gamers, I've only seen its E3 walkthrough and thats it, I need to see NOTHING MORE to sell me on a Fallout game.

The Division? What is that? I know not of what it is because I've yet to spend 200 plus hours in such a game, thus...its a mystery to me.

The Darkzone? Sooo thats just PVP? What is outside that? Just NPC's? Can real people rob or kill me outside the darkzone when exploring? How many interiors? How does water effect the character?

Many questions just based on its new, I don't know just how deep it actually is based on a few trailers and walkthroughs.

The Division needs many shows to have it advertised much more, even if you end up not liking it after hearing what it is, at least it saved you time, money and you won't end up flaming Ubisoft for releasing something based on what you "thought" it was based on a 6 month advertising campaign.

That is literally just E3, Gamescom and release. They just can't do that.

My issue is with folks like FOX who seem to ignorantly think its a one size fits all.

Fallout 4 again isn't all IPs, most IPs won't just be using their last engines, most can't afford to just announce 6 months prior to release, most are clearly not as established either.

I mean....are we not forgetting that even Fallout 3 was announced a year and half before release?

For established IPs, I'm fine with a year to 6 months or even 2 years, same with new IPs.

Games are expensive to make and many companies can't just show off a game then release in 6 months hoping for the best.

UltraNova3233d ago (Edited 3233d ago )

Lets not forget the fact that platform makers can exert a lot of pressure on devs to show their games in game expos if they need to fill a slot during their 2 hour conferences.

I mean who(MS/Sony) wouldn't want GTAVI's head of development to show up and announce their new game on their E3 conference next year if they feel they don't have a compelling lineup, even if GTAVI is 3+ years away...

_-EDMIX-_3233d ago

@Ultra- They can, but I don't see any developer or publisher showing a game just for Sony or MS's sake.

Sony and MS are merely asking, they don't have much pull to force anyone to reveal anything they clearly don't want to.

UltraNova3233d ago (Edited 3233d ago )


I would agree with you if not for previously multiform games turning exclusive and shown on said platforms holder stages first, years before release which not only proves my point above but amplifies it.


BTW that ^^^ goes both ways, keep your pants on guys.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3233d ago
_-EDMIX-_3233d ago

@FOX- "Then it's built up enough hype to sell the game without raising peoples expectations"

Thats sorta any gamer's own fault to begin with, I don't think any company should be trying to rush a game out based on "raising peoples expectations".

Also factor that some of those titles still have large marketing budgets and many publishers and even developers would like a long window prior to release to address issues and to also continue to market ala GTA.

GTA V was announced in 2011, released in 2013. They want a STRONG presence prior to release, that is up to them to decide that, they have a major IP and they want it marketed properly vs this rushed 6 months to market with "meh" marketing.

I mean....are we forgetting that gaming is also a business?

Some can do it, some can't, its up to developers and publishers to actually decided that.

Its not a one size fits all.

joab7773233d ago

This is what Bethesda has always done. They did it w/ Fallout 3, and Skyrim was only 11 moths out. I'm guess it was pushed up to make the VGA's that yr. It was only a teaser w an announcement date. Then at E3, we got all the info.

Yeah. It's hard to fo, and we all knew it was being made, that it was set in Boston, that it was huge etc.

Bit this is the main reason why devs should follow suit, and why Bethesda really does this. They are a cash cow, and like CoD and betas, can only afford to lose. The longer the game is out, the more it can be analyzed and picked apart, the more the fervor dies down, and the more they stand to lose.

For example, Gamescom showed similar demos of the game and it wasn't even playable. If we remember Skyrim, we didn't really know a whole lot until we got our hands on it. We just knew all of the GOOD things about the game.

Now, Bethesda has earned this respect through brilliant marketing and almost unparalleled quality. And, as was stated, more devs (not all) should follow suit, for our benefit and theirs. It does no good today to take a small slice of a product and put it in the wild to be dissected. Only new IPS or devs should test the waters, especially of they are attempting to Guage public perception.

frostypants3233d ago

@joab777, "unparalleled quality"?! Betheda has a reputation for terrible QA and bug-riddled games at release, however fun their games may be.

3-4-53233d ago

* The wait in between announcement and release can sometimes kill the hype or mute it a bit, if the wait is too long.

The in between time can lead to other game announcements which trump your announcement and then your game isn't quite as exciting as it was.

* Back in the 90's you heard of a game, and then almost immediately got to play it. It kept the hype at maximum level.

donthate3233d ago

I think games like Last Guardian and the Agent is a total disservice towards gamers. Even games like Shenmue 3 who hasn't even started yet, and FF VII that is expected in 2017/2018 shouldn't be announced.

I think the general rule should be show only if you have game mechanics, story, artwork, cinematics and sound almost done (or combinations thereof) before announcing. By minimum you should have a release date within the next 18 months!

Ideally you should announce games no more than 6-8 months out.

MS has done a good job so far about this in recent times. Sony is kind of following with Horizon and SFV.

Outthink_The_Room3233d ago (Edited 3233d ago )

You're going to blame the developers because gamers can't keep their expectations in check? SERIOUSLY?

That is absolutely ridiculous. Not to mention the fact that nobody is forcing a company to physically play the demo on stage. There are dozens of examples of captured gameplay where a company doesn't need to have a ZBR build perfectly tuned for an E3 or Gamescom or GDC or PSX..etc..

At the past few E3's, both MS and Sony had multiple demos on stage without developers physically playing them. Hell, Fallout 4 ITSELF didn't have someone playing. That was recorded gameplay, that literally did the SAME JOB it would have, had it been played by a dev on stage.

To justify a short marketing campaign because of demos, is an absolutely terrible argument. Good Grief Charlie Brown.........

-Foxtrot3233d ago

How can gamers keep there expectations in check when developers in all these interviews until the games release will say "exaggerated" things to raise them

Outthink_The_Room3233d ago


So you're saying, a longer marketing campaign FORCES A DEVELOPER TO LIE?

Is this a joke or are you seriously trying to justify this?

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 3233d ago
sullynathan3233d ago

Bethesda knows how to market their games very well.

peshkavusCA3233d ago

Probably from Jrpg fanatics.

WellyUK3233d ago

they don't really need to anymore tbh it's going to sell anyway.

theFAYEsorceress3233d ago

i like bethesda's decision. less time for people to build up unrealistic expectations and just be legitimately excited for something. also shows that the game is pretty much done. no real chance of getting games that turn into vaporware when it's that close to being done. more devs should be doing this.

uth113233d ago

And the graphics shown will be the actual graphics or close, so no crying about downgrades

ajax173233d ago

I wish more developers would do this

Brandon_25353233d ago

I agree completely.

Having to wait a year or two (or more) for a game gets old rather quickly. If there's a delay, it makes it that much worse. The hype for the game just completely goes away.

The way Fallout 4 was announced was absolute perfection. Gave us a small teaser video, which was then quickly followed up by a great showing at E3. A good amount of gameplay and info for the core features. To top it all off, they reveal that the game will be releasing in just a few short months.

I remember when The Division was announced and I was extremely excited for it. Delay after delay has caused nearly all of my hype for it to dissipate. Not only that, but it has me worried about if the game will even be any good when it finally does get released, nearly three years later.

Another thing that bothers me, albeit not as much, is when a game is announced and they take forever to announce a release date. All they tell you is that they'll announce a date when the game is done. Which, is better than them giving a date and not following up on it because of a delay or whatever, but it's still super annoying to be interested in a game when you don't even know when it'll be coming out. The first game that comes to my mind in relation to this would be No Man's Sky. Game was announced like two years ago and we're still waiting for a release date. It just makes you really frustrated.

_-EDMIX-_3233d ago

"I remember when The Division was announced and I was extremely excited for it. Delay after delay has caused nearly all of my hype for it to dissipate"

...well then you clearly didn't want it that badly. Do you want it for what it is, or based on some sorta of excitement? At the end of the day, the concept is why you should be excited for a game, not when its likely to release lol

I mean...would that not actually be worse based on your buying it with very limited time understanding what it actually going to be? I'm learning ever event more and more of what the Division is vs what I though it was prior.

" It just makes you really frustrated"

Enough to not buy it? I mean LOL! Are we buying games to play or based on when we first saw it? When March comes next year, I'm still getting the Division, same if Fallout 4 where to come out next year based on a delay.....I would still get it.

No amount of time just makes me all of a sudden not become a gamer any longer.

I get it sucks when games gets delayed, but the only time I really care is if it impacts what the concept originally was ie they showed you a horror game and you got an RTS type deal.

If its what they promised, I'm fine. Some of the greatest games I've ever played have been delayed many, many times from HL2, to Goldeneye, if its still what was shown, then I'm fine.

I care about playing it, never mind when it comes, that doesn't change that its still something I want to play.

I tend to not by games based on um "hype" I buy them based on what they actually are vs what I want them to be, thats something that can hurt any game regardless of release and thats not even the publisher or developers fault that someone is excited for a game based on false reasons.

If an amount of time can make you change your mind, I question how badly you wanted it to begin with.
I'm actually still getting The Division in march, its a new IP and I feel the time they are spending to make sure its released working is very much worth it.

I care more about playing it then when it released.

Brandon_25353233d ago


It feels like you took everything I said completely out of context. I never said I purchase games based on my hype level for them, nor did I mention anything about not buying a game because I didn't like the release date. I said that I don't like waiting a year or two for a game after they announce it, or having a game be delayed, but I never said that those things were determining factors in purchasing a game for myself.

I want nothing more than to play great games, but you'd be lying if you said that having to wait for a game didn't bother you. Either that, or you have a legendary level of patience.

_-EDMIX-_3233d ago

@Brandon- I agree. No one likes waiting for anything lol, I would by lying if I stated I didn't.

"legendary level of patience" buddy, you have no idea.

Though I don't like waiting for a game anymore then any other gamer, I completely understand why they are announcing it when they are, they still have a business to fund and it makes sense.

I agree with you on excitement to a degree when a game is announced that has a long development cylce.

I believe when they first show a game, even in trailer form, they must be very transparent with what the core concept is and isn't.

Just from a teaser, many might have assumptions due to lack of information on what the title is only to find out its not what they "thought" it was.

This will cause a lost sale, but it was never a sale they where ever going to get anyway, but it also makes it hard to gauge fan interest.

How can they seek feed back on a game that many "think" they know? I still don't know the survival aspect of The Division and like Fallout, I really, really love that.

What If I want The Division just to explore, survive etc? I might be "hyped" for something that isn't even fully confirmed or properly conveyed.

But that might be more due to improper marketing as suppose to showing it too early.

I might have just read your frustration with delays a bit too much.

I don't disagree with you that The Division could have just not had a release date, but knows just how many times they might have truly felt it was "ready" and they found issues. They likely don't want a repeat of AC Unity.

AC Unity can survive that type of launch, a new IP legit could die with a launch that buggy.

WellyUK3233d ago

Far Cry 4 did this had a reveal trailer then released 6 or so months later but then again that game was just a copy and paste of the last game.

--bienio--3233d ago

Every game should be 6 months from announce to launch tbh.