Why did bethesda let obsidian develop fallout: new vegas?

[Maximilian]

Ive been snooping around wikipedia and learning a bit about the whole fallout franchise since im into fallout 3 now and psyched about new vegas. What happened with black isle is a bit like what happened with a lot of companies involved with EA, their staff left and formed a new company due to EA sucking hard or interplay sucking hard in this case. I never saw EA offering petroglyph a chance to develop a new c&c or anything though.

Why did bethesda let obsidian who are mostly former black isle people develop this game? Are they just nice guys at bethesda or what?

 

[JSt0rm]

maybe they are busy with other projects?

 

[Schadenfroh]

I would feel uncomfortable helping to perpetuate the corruption of one of my children, if I were Obsidian.

 

[CottonRabbit]

Because they felt sorry for Obsidian after seeing the critical and commercial failure that is Alpha Protocol.

 

[mwmorph]

It makes sense in that the old Black Isle guys can make Fallout 3 better by injecting more of the original's attitude. I like Obsidian, not polished games, but always a good plot. They're no bioware when it comes to polish and gameplay but the plot keeps me hooked on their games, something Bethesda can't say for their games.

I actually enjoyed Alpha Protocol, the gameplay was mediocre but it's always been the story and character development that got me to finish RPGs.

 

[KaOTiK]

It makes sense in that the old Black Isle guys can make Fallout 3 better by injecting more of the original's attitude. I like Obsidian, not polished games, but always a good plot. They're no bioware when it comes to polish and gameplay but the plot keeps me hooked on their games, something Bethesda can't say for their games.

I actually enjoyed Alpha Protocol, the gameplay was mediocre but it's always been the story and character development that got me to finish RPGs.

the lack of polish will fit right in with bethesda titles

 

[TheFlyingSquirrel]

It makes sense in that the old Black Isle guys can make Fallout 3 better by injecting more of the original's attitude. I like Obsidian, not polished games, but always a good plot. They're no bioware when it comes to polish and gameplay but the plot keeps me hooked on their games, something Bethesda can't say for their games.

I actually enjoyed Alpha Protocol, the gameplay was mediocre but it's always been the story and character development that got me to finish RPGs.

I always felt obsidian games were always just a few steps behind bioware rpg's
they're fun but always feels sort of incomplete and usually more buggy

 

[EvilComputer92]

I never saw EA offering petroglyph a chance to develop a new c&c or anything though.

It's good they didn't. Petroglyph has made nothing but crap games. Universe at War anyone.

After the surprisingly excellent CNC3 though, EA totally dropped the ball with the franchise with each game failing more than the next.

Also Fallout New Vegas looks like nothing more than a 50 dollar expansion for FO3. I can't believe they're still stuck with the buggy gamebryo engine since 2006.

 

[Lonyo]

They wanted to try and produce the buggiest game ever.
They realised that even with their Gamebryo skills, they couldn't manage it, so they quickly had a meeting to think of a company famous for producing sequels which aren't bad, but end up being horribly buggy, then they hit upon Obsidian.
They decided that if they combined Obsidian with a fairly open world game on a buggy engine, either it would become a black hole of bugs, or it would be the most amazing thing ever. The outcome would be insanely epic either way, so they decided to run with the idea, and now we're here.

So, if the world ends soon, you know who is to blame.

 

[Zenoth]

Maybe because Obsidian simply asked them, and then perhaps it turned out that with more spare hands on their own due to not having to (possibly) work on another Fallout title by themselves that Bethesda's team(s) could concentrate on another project. Additionally, Obsidian knows the Fallout universe, so it was pretty logic to let them handle a new Fallout title rather than a new comer to the said universe.

 

[Martimus]

It's good they didn't. Petroglyph has made nothing but crap games. Universe at War anyone.

After the surprisingly excellent CNC3 though, EA totally dropped the ball with the franchise with each game failing more than the next.

Also Fallout New Vegas looks like nothing more than a 50 dollar expansion for FO3. I can't believe they're still stuck with the buggy gamebryo engine since 2006.

Other than being buggy and unstable, I actually liked Universe at War. I had a lot of fun with that game.

I would like to see how different Obsidians new version of Fallout turns out than Bethesdas.

 

[skace]

They wanted to try and produce the buggiest game ever.
They realised that even with their Gamebryo skills, they couldn't manage it, so they quickly had a meeting to think of a company famous for producing sequels which aren't bad, but end up being horribly buggy, then they hit upon Obsidian.
They decided that if they combined Obsidian with a fairly open world game on a buggy engine, either it would become a black hole of bugs, or it would be the most amazing thing ever. The outcome would be insanely epic either way, so they decided to run with the idea, and now we're here.

So, if the world ends soon, you know who is to blame.

I like Obsidian and Bethesda, but this is truly awesome

 

[PhatoseAlpha]

At any rate, a much better question would be why shouldn't Bethesda let them? At the very least, Bethsoft will get a flat license fee, plus royalties if it sells well, all without devoting staff to developing a new game. New Vegas keeps the franchise in people's minds - always a good thing for an IP owner. If it does well, it increases the value of their franchies. If it doesn't - well, after Tactics and Brotherhood of Steel, it's probably a given that Fallout is resilient to crappy games. Feargus Urqhart of Obsidian was the lead on Fallout 2, so they have extensive experience. Why shouldn't they?

 

[Maximilian]

At any rate, a much better question would be why shouldn't Bethesda let them? At the very least, Bethsoft will get a flat license fee, plus royalties if it sells well, all without devoting staff to developing a new game. New Vegas keeps the franchise in people's minds - always a good thing for an IP owner. If it does well, it increases the value of their franchies. If it doesn't - well, after Tactics and Brotherhood of Steel, it's probably a given that Fallout is resilient to crappy games. Feargus Urqhart of Obsidian was the lead on Fallout 2, so they have extensive experience. Why shouldn't they?

I think its a great idea that they did it but im used to seeing companies doing stupid things like EA making simcity societies, casual gamers dont give a rats ass about city builders, or EA sitting on tons of potentially profitable IP that has gotten more and more worthless over time as people move on and forget about it or EA screwing up C&C so its a total joke now heh. See a pattern Im sure theres other companies besides EA that do stuff like this but i cant think of any off the top of my head, its just nice to see devs and publishers working together like bethesda and obsidian as they share experience with the same IP.

@EvilComputer92
Yeah petroglyph has been rather dissapointing but i think if westwood had continued c&c it wouldve been awesome. There would have been no generals or any other lousy game that came after it. No way to prove this but what ishmael said on the petroglyph forums ages ago about about what they had planned for the next c&c game story sounded very cool, much better than the generic crap storyline thats been told in c&c3 & 4.

 

[shortylickens]

Looking at the past few years I honestly believe Obsidian makes better games than Bethesda.

 

[nitromullet]

It's a win-win situation for Bethesda. If New Vegas is really good it shows that Bethesda has the sense to enlist the originators of the IP for their creative talent even though Bethesda now owns the Fallout franchise. If New Vegas isn't good it proves their acquisition of the IP is the best thing to happen to the Fallout franchise because the originators can't make a game as good as Bethesda.

 

[nastymoon]

Because and I do hope their busy working on TES V

 

[Schadenfroh]

Because and I do hope their busy working on TES V

That is going to be like TES III rather than TES IV.

 

[jonks]

eh, KOTOR 2 was a very solid game ending sniggles aside, and the NWN2 expansions weren't that bad either. Obsidian might not be the best when they start from the ground up *cough*AlphaProtocol*cough*, but when they develop someone else's established property they seem to do a fair job.

 

[motsm]

It's a win-win situation for Bethesda. If New Vegas is really good it shows that Bethesda has the sense to enlist the originators of the IP for their creative talent even though Bethesda now owns the Fallout franchise. If New Vegas isn't good it proves their acquisition of the IP is the best thing to happen to the Fallout franchise because the originators can't make a game as good as Bethesda.

I don't think that's true, since they are having to base it off of the already established new formula that is Fallout 3. If they made Fallout 3 from scratch, most likely it would be nothing like Bethesda's Fallout 3, or New Vegas.

 

[nitromullet]

I don't think that's true, since they are having to base it off of the already established new formula that is Fallout 3. If they made Fallout 3 from scratch, most likely it would be nothing like Bethesda's Fallout 3, or New Vegas.

That's exactly my point... Fallout 3 was pretty well liked by gamers and critics. Sure, there were a few that didn't like it, but by any measure of video game success Fallout 3 was a winner for Bethesda. The basic game play mechanics have already been established by Bethesda, so it's up to Obsidian to either make or break the content in New Vegas. It's pretty much a win-win situation for Bethesda.

 

[fatpat268]

Looking at the past few years I honestly believe Obsidian makes better games than Bethesda.

Obsidian: The one developer who can produce unfinished and unpolished shit, and people apologize for them.

 

[PhatoseAlpha]

No, there are a lot of those, including Bethesda.