Fallout 4 developer may not be Bethesda

By Updated on

It has been a while since we last had any substantial Fallout 4 news to give you, but we could have something very interesting for you to digest this week. It’s not particularly good news though as there are whispers emerging that Bethesda may actually not develop Fallout 4 themselves, instead handing over duties to another team at ZeniMax Studios.

What a turn out this would be if there’s any truth to it. We advise you to take the following information with a pinch of salt though as details are still very thin with no real concrete evidence behind it.

We can tell you though that the latest Fallout 4 rumors are revolving around the fact that the game could be developed by Battlecry Studios. This is a newly setup team by Zenimax Studios, a team that are based in Austin, Texas.

We’ve spotted on Zenimax’s website that the publisher and developer is now hiring for all sorts of new job openings. These include applications for a Lead VFX Artist, a Senior Level Designer, Senior Environment Artist and a Senior Graphics Engineer.

What’s more interesting is the job descriptions behind these listings. You can see these on Zenimax’s website by clicking on the More Info tab beside a job post.

The description under Senior Environment Artist caught our eye the most, as it reads:

“BattleCry Studios, the newest ZeniMax studio in Austin, is seeking a talented Senior Environment Artist to help create high quality environment art for an undisclosed AAA PC and next-generation console game.”

Play close attention to the fact that this is specifically related to a next-gen and PC AAA game. Which other next-gen, PC AAA games do you know that is thought to be in development and will be published by ZeniMax Studios?

Evidence is pointing towards Fallout 4 if you put together the clues, but then again is this the right move after Fallout: New Vegas? Fans will want to see Bethesda and only Bethesda develop Fallout 4, but we don’t know if members of the Fallout 3 team will be working alongside Battlecry Studios.

This is something very interesting to keep an eye on as we wait for further information to unfold. In the meantime, give us your reaction and opinions on this below.

Also See: Fallout 4 release date in 2015, the ideal revelation

fallout-4-developed-by-battlecry-studios

  • Twm

    Mmm no, zenimax has already said that they want to do a fallout new Vegas 2, but they are waiting to see what bathesda has planned, they pretty much said that they are just as excited as the fans for the announcement.

    What AAA title? well they did make elder scrolls online, so starting a new company to help with the various add-ones it will no doubtable require might be “the game” they are advertising.

  • Gavin Reese

    Its more likely that its a new IP completely unrelated to what BGS is doing. Saying its Next-gen AAA doesn’t automatically make it Fallout 4. Also Bethesda had two titles in development prior to announcing Skyrim, the second game most likely being Fallout 4.

  • No

    WHAT!

  • Hexarchy

    First thing, don’t make generalised statements like “Fans will want to
    see Bethesda and only Bethesda develop Fallout 4″. Many fans, including
    myself, were disappointed in FO3 and view New Vegas as a vastly superior
    game, and I hope that Bethesda hands the project over to Obsidian.

    Actually, if you looked at the job descriptions, ZeniMax is looking for
    “Design, build, and iterate multiplayer map levels”

    Multiplayer. Bethesda have always claimed that they won’t create multiplayer as it would detract from the single-player experience. Granted, they could outsource the MP aspect, but even then it seems unlikely.

    • Joel Bhatt

      Why would you be disappointed with FO3 but then say NV is vastly superior? What’s the major difference?

      • Copadon

        You make it seem as if Fallout 3 and New Vegas are 100% exactly alike. They aren’t. They were developed by completely different companies, and its very obvious too.

        Fallout 3 was incredibly lacking compared to New Vegas in everything but atmosphere and, I guess locales too. Vegas had more than 2x as many weapons, you weren’t showered with skill points literally all the time, you could actually USE melee and unarmed without end-game gear, and the perks weren’t horrible from start to finish. A character build extended FAR beyond just using boring, typical weapons because those were actually viable ones. As well, the DLC’s weren’t atrocious for Vegas either. The only dlcs anyone EVER says was good in 3 involved The Pitt and Point Lookout, which had HUGE issues. For Vegas the gripes were much more minor.

        No one ever, EVER seems to acknowledge these things, and the best argument I’ve ever seen in Fallout 3′s favour are all opinions. I.e. “It felt better”.

        • 2345

          Well said

        • Joel Bhatt

          I personally never had huge issues with the Fallout 3 DLC but I guess I was just lucky. I know The Pitt was known to be quite buggy. I haven’t played NV enough yet to really appreciate all the improvements, although I didn’t like the way things had to be played in a certain order for certain companion quests to work, but that was my only big gripe with NV. Some of the early energy weapons don’t have a very satisfying sound either, but that’s easily put up with.

          I wasn’t implying NV is 100% like F3 I was just asking because I didn’t see that much difference before. I wouldn’t say NV is vastly superior but I would say that the DLC is better from what I’ve seen my brother play.

          I appreciate why people wouldn’t like the linearity of Operation Anchorage or Mothership Zeta but I found the change of play entertaining, especially since I hadn’t explored every inch of the Wasteland yet by the time the first DLC was released.

  • Woodhouse

    Bethesda owns the id Software franchises now, so based on the multiplayer qualifications in the listings, it’s likely a new Quake or Doom game

  • Woodhouse

    Let’s see… Doom 4 is thought to be in development by Zenimax and rumors persist of Quake V as well. Battlecry is finishing up the latest Wolfenstein installment, so they would logically move onto another id Software franchise, as Zenimax bought them out in 2009…

    Take 30 seconds to check Wikipedia next time.

  • Goggalor

    “But then again is this the right move after Fallout: New Vegas?” No, no it is not. I want Obsidian to make another Fallout game.

    • yes

      yeah give fallout back to the guys who originally made it. some of em were in obsidian.

      • nate

        Why would you deviate from Bethesda after FO3 and FONV??? I don’t understand the logic. Imagine what they could do after years of hindsight and insights as to what they could improve on.

  • Kaydan Howison

    Fallout: New Vegas was better than Fallout 3. The only reason it’s worse is due to some of the more game hindering bugs which were mostly Bethesda’s fault for rushing them to finish the product in the first place. If anyone should make the next one it should be Obsidian.

  • mike hunewskon

    new vegas was a bag of anal beads compared to fallout 3…bethesda will be developing fallout 4…no way they will be letting an outside studio build a game from the ground up which is what they would need to do for the new generation…new vegas was in the same engine as fallout 3 so really obsidian just built a game with all the components bethesda already created for fallout 3

    • capn krunch

      Some of Obsidian’s team are responsible for making Fallout and Fallout 2, they had considerably less time to make New Vegas than Bethesda took to make 3 and Bethesda didn’t create the Gamebryo engine, nor are they the only ones to use it. Plus, you talk as if anal beads are a bad thing. Some people would be ecstatic to have a bag of them.

      • Neoimperialist

        Obsidian has never once released a properly finished game, so I’m not convinced that they would have done any better with New Vegas even had they had until the second coming to get it done. Truth to tell, the more Obsidina games I have played, the better I understand Interplay’s decision to close down Black Isle.

    • Josh Weikel

      Lol, what? New Vegas improved on so many game mechanics over F3 and the writing was 5 times better. If you don’t like the western setting, fine. But New Vegas was a real fallout game. Do your homework chump.

      • Neoimperialist

        Oh, here we go again, with the “New Vegas was truer to the original games” argument. How about, I couldn’t care less? Nobody under 40 years old even remembers those games anymore. New Vegas sold on the back of Fallout 3. Period. Fallout 3 was what they had and Fallout 3 was the reason that the fans couldn’t wait to get their hands on New Vegas. Then New Vegas turned out to be a technical and artistic disaster because Obsidian doesn’t know what it means to release a finished game. Obsidian didn’t improve anything, and in fact broke a lot of things that were working fine in Fallout 3. Bethesda had best get Fallout 4 right, because nobody is ever going to forget New Vegas. I wouldn’t be surprised if initial sales were slow because people will be waiting for the legitimate reviews to come out before making the purchase.

        • Josh Weikel

          Ok, so it was the heat of the moment typing – I didn’t mean to launch a “truer to old games” argument. They’re both great games worthy of the Fallout name.

          List of thing NV improved over F3:
          1) Iron sights
          2) Speech Tests
          3) Repairing – everything about it
          4) Society finally rebuilding
          5) Writing
          6) Dialogue options
          7) Perks, perks, perks
          8) Traits
          9) Reputation
          10) Gun modding
          11) Different ammo

          If you want to argue that Karma was better utilized in F3, I’d agree. Beyond that, there wasn’t a single thing F3 has over NV unless you prefer the post-apocalyptic setting over the west. Finally, to call NV any sort of disaster is laughable. You might be able to argue it wasn’t as successful as F3, but it was absolutely a smash hit. Also, (to borrow from Southpark), NV wasn’t great because NV followed F3, NV was great because it was a Fallout game, period – same reason F3 was great, and anything that you think NV broke, it was already broken in F3 too. If you still want to argue this, I’m not going to waste anymore of my time on people who have no idea what they’re talking about. Peace.

  • FalloutBoy

    I just hope this isn’t true because the listings say they are looking for level designers etc, which means development would still be in early stages. I want the next Fallout now…but this year would be bearable. I don’t wanna wait until 2015 :(

    • Josh Weikel

      They haven’t hyped it up, released promotional material, or even announced yet. I do hope I’m wrong, but it’s not coming out this year, and 2015 would be a best-case scenario.

  • Neoimperialist

    I don’t know what possessed Bethesda to give the last project to Obsidian, given their dismal reputation to that point. If Bethesda fobs off this project to an inferior studio again, I’m probably going to be done with the series.