E3 2018: Bethesda Confirms Fallout 76 Is An Always-Online, Multiplayer-Focused Game

But you can also play solo.

168 Comments
Please use a html5 video capable browser to watch videos.
This video has an invalid file format.
00:00:00
Sorry, but you can't access this content!
Please enter your date of birth to view this video

By clicking 'enter', you agree to GameSpot's
Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

Now Playing: Todd Howard Shows Off Fallout 76 At Xbox E3 2018

We have finally learned exactly what Fallout 76 is. At the Bethesda E3 2018 briefing, director Todd Howard confirmed that Fallout 76 is a multiplayer-focused, always-online game. The characters you come across in Fallout 76 are real people. The game is entirely online, marking a dramatic shift away from the single-player-only nature of earlier games in the series.

However, you can also play by yourself, Howard confirmed. "Of course you can play this solo," he said. Regarding why Bethesda is taking Fallout in such a new and different direction, Howard said, "We've always wanted to see what our style of game could be with multiplayer."

No Caption Provided
Gallery image 1Gallery image 2Gallery image 3Gallery image 4Gallery image 5Gallery image 6Gallery image 7Gallery image 8Gallery image 9Gallery image 10Gallery image 11Gallery image 12Gallery image 13Gallery image 14Gallery image 15Gallery image 16Gallery image 17Gallery image 18Gallery image 19

Bethesda came up with the idea for Fallout 76 four years ago, Howard said. That would mean Bethesda started working on the game before Fallout 4 came out in 2015. And overall, he describes it as a "softcore survival" game.

Howard also clarified that after you die, you'll keep your character progression, which is good to hear. "Death never means the loss of progression or your character," he said. It had been believed prior to the full reveal that Fallout 76 would resemble Rust, a game where progression can be lost.

Along with a variety of details and trailers, we also learned Fallout 76's release date is set for November 14. It's also getting two different special editions, one of which--the Power Armor edition--comes with a wearable helmet that is equipped with a working voice modulator and headlamp.

Got a news tip or want to contact us directly? Email news@gamespot.com

Join the conversation
There are 168 comments about this story
168 Comments  RefreshSorted By 
GameSpot has a zero tolerance policy when it comes to toxic conduct in comments. Any abusive, racist, sexist, threatening, bullying, vulgar, and otherwise objectionable behavior will result in moderation and/or account termination. Please keep your discussion civil.

Avatar image for RELeon
RELeon

Ill try to keep my hopes up for this, but honestly I can't believe Fallout went down the Multiplayer Survival route....so many games are changing their genres and playstyles to keep up with trends and it makes me a little sad.

Like I said, Ill try to keep an open mind, but I won't set my hopes TOO high....

Avatar image for KillzoneSnake
KillzoneSnake

Goodbye fallout.

Avatar image for tiringpillow
TiringPillow

I’m skeptical, but unlike all the single player only social introverts I’ll keep an open mind for now.

Avatar image for nz
Nz

@tiringpillow:

Nothing wrong with wanting to enjoy a game by yourself without it being a social media sharing type of scenario or you know... chatting with someone while you loot a corpse.

Call me old school but I play games because I enjoy them, I don't need to make online friends or social network or experience the joy of being shot in the back by some teammate calling himself "StarWarsDude69". It's just not for me.

Avatar image for redhedjack
redhedjack

How fitting this game revolves around disaster.

Avatar image for Redsyrup
Redsyrup

Bethesda to EA: Hold my Beer.

I couldn't be more disappointed as a Fallout fan. Bethesda knows how much better Fallout 3 is compared to Fallout 4 and this is how they choose to follow that game? What's with these massive mega corporations that assume their franchises are indestructible?

Avatar image for gunnyninja
GunnyNinja

Wait, you just gave griefers nuclear weapons?

Avatar image for Ansem_Rev
Ansem_Rev

Remember when they said they would only be making single player games ???? Yeah yeahhhh...

Avatar image for Chizaqui
Chizaqui

@Ansem_Rev: Right?

Avatar image for jergernice1
JergerNIce1

pass

Avatar image for noforceken
NoForceKen

So, we can't state an opinion opposed to the website without getting banned now? And you use vulgar language in your videos, yet it's against the terms of service to use it in the comments. **** you Gamespot.

Avatar image for dont_redirectme
dont_redirectme

@noforceken: Created like, my tenth account now. Silly GS thinking they can ban me permanently. I come back in like 5 mins. Unlimited email and IP addresses.

Avatar image for wwefan4ever
wwefan4ever

So much cringe with this game.

Avatar image for nabinator
Nabinator

This concept actually looks really interesting. It's different, yes, but did we really just want a Fallout 4.5?

With multiplayer elements, this could be interesting, especially if they keep the same engine/gameplay

Avatar image for Chizaqui
Chizaqui

@nabinator: Yes and no. I would have liked an apologetic game for Fallout 4. In Bethesda's history, F4 was the worst. It really had no business being called Fallout.

I would have loved a game of Skyrim's scope in the Fallout universe, because us longtime fans don't want 1 quest giver and an empty world.

Avatar image for nabinator
Nabinator

@nibbin1191: I preferred 4 to 3, but loved NV over both of them

Avatar image for Chizaqui
Chizaqui

@nibbin1191: I've heard that so many times. And it's easy to explain. Fallout 4 is a decent shooter/minecraft mixup, but a terrible Fallout game. And the exact premise of the entire game is insulting, if you take time to think about it. They put the absolute minimum effort into writing the story (seriously, the OG Resident Evil from the PS1 days had better writing) and whatever they thought was missing from their "large" world, they filled with insanely mundane radiant quests. If that wasn't all that bad, they set a good portion of the game world FOR THE PLAYER TO BUILD.

"Heh, we're so good at world building, we're not even gonna try with this one."

So, yeah, if you enjoyed it, cool. But it's as much a Fallout game as MGS Survive is a Metal Gear game (coincidentally, 76's asset flippery + keen eye on survival + decimating the corpse of a once great and storied franchise=Konami's exact strategy.)

Avatar image for chubby170
Chubby170

@Chizaqui: "A good portion of the game world for the player to build"? Where exactly is that? The only places I foudn to build were just at settlement locations. I hardly wasted 10 minutes building anything and enjoyed like 60 hrs+ of gameplay.

So curious what "portion of the game world" was for the player to build on?

Avatar image for Chizaqui
Chizaqui

@chubby170: Of a total of 325 locations, 30 were left for building settlements, and many of those locations were devoid of anything of merit. It's actually a little strange that so many open world games come out, and the world seems to trash them for being pristine copies with little heart, yet Bethesda just slid through on this one. Like I've said before though, if you are looking for a game that allows you to build a post-apocalyptic community while having some pretty great and engaging combat and emergent gameplay, Fallout 4 nails that.

What they didn't nail was anything the series (and what really surprised me, the developer) had come to be known for.

Avatar image for chubby170
Chubby170

@Chizaqui: Id disagree with that. Ive played FO4, first one I ever played. Then went back to play FO3 and now playing FONV. I dont see really any differences of what you are mentioning.

Also, i really have no clue what "post apocalyptic community" it is that you feel you were building? Sorry, must have missed that completely.

Avatar image for Chizaqui
Chizaqui

@chubby170: Here's what FO4 is missing from its earlier iterations:

The roleplaying was just decimated. From the earliest introductions to FO4's god-building character progressions, this is obvious. Previous games limited you to building a character, which built the RPG elements.

Narrative focus, or lack thereof. FO4's narrative wasn't just bad, but at most points in the game, you can tell it's just missing. They took you from a game world that invited you to sit down and talk to people to a game world that invited you to walk in and murder people, finding the tiniest tidbits of story from inanimate objects. This is big, as part of world building is filling the world with interesting and fleshed-out NPC's (as far as RPG's go anyway. I mean, I don't play Bethesda games to see an Ubisoft open world.)

As part of narrative focus, the decision to cut down dialogue was just terrible. Stock choices all leading to the same ending. And I can recall when Bioware caught a lot of flak for that same problem in Mass Effect 3.

And, oh my goodness, those radiant quests. Much ado has been made in RPG's past about how terrible fetch quests are, but you have to kind of admire Bethesda's moxie here... they filled Fallout full of fetch quests but somehow nobody seemed to mind because they were called "radiant quests!" Now, they'd done this in Skyrim, but nowhere close to the degree that they delivered in Fallout 4. You'd help a settlement and think 'okay, they can live peacefully now' only to have Preston Garvey randomly choose Oberland Station time and again to be the target of Super mutant or bandit attacks... even though the entirety of the surrounding area was cleared of any kind of threat. Their fetch quests weren't only tedious, but broke immersion (another big key-point for RPGs) almost ritualistically.

And had I known that Fallout 4 was not supposed to be an RPG, but a shooter/world builder instead, I would have passed on it and had nothing to say other than "I can't wait until they decide to make another RPG-Fallout." Yet, here we are.

Avatar image for chubby170
Chubby170

@Chizaqui: Yea, lets just leave it to difference of opinions as the only thing I agree with you on is the radiant quests... Other than that, I liked FO4 just as much as FO3 and FONV, and dont see really anything wrong with it at all. To me, FO4 had a much, much better story than FO3. Im playing FONV now and id say the same so far but still a lot to go.

Avatar image for Chizaqui
Chizaqui

@chubby170: Therein lies the rub. I'm not saying that FO4 shouldn't be enjoyed by anyone. I know quite a few people that played it and loved it, and I get that.

Unfortunately, I know a lot of people like myself, who feel like they've been taken for a ride, money-wise. I'm thankful that Bethesda at least announced what kind of game 76 was before it launched, but then they were still taking pre-orders prior to that explanation. In any other industry, I think they'd chalk that up to false advertisement. And I just happen to believe that companies that participate in these kinds of shenanigans should be held responsible.

But by all means, I hope you enjoy them all.

Avatar image for Chizaqui
Chizaqui

@nibbin1191: No, an insult is about as spot on as one can be. Look at the actual content size of previous games. The strategy guide for F4 was half the size of Skyrim, and much less than New Vegas. That's because the world was empty.

And frankly, if you can't understand how F4 doesn't really fit into the rest of the Fallout series, I promise you it's not "me being silly" but a problem with fundamental levels of understanding.

Avatar image for georgekaplin197
georgekaplin197

@Chizaqui: Size doesn't matter..... I'd take FO:NV any day. And now "4 times bigger than FO4" makes no difference whatsoever if its 4x maps of running around doing "Brah" emotes only to get nuked by some kid who spends all day leveling up while I'm at work!

I agree on your bigger point though. Story is key otherwise its just another lame MP. To be honest, aside from the familiar vault suits this game looks just like a lo-res rage2 or any other number of games.

Avatar image for Thanatos2k
Thanatos2k

@nibbin1191: Plenty of people adore Dragon Age 2, but it's still a terrible game. And so on.

Avatar image for Thanatos2k
Thanatos2k

@nibbin1191: Exactly. Just like Fallout 4.

Avatar image for Maize84
Maize84

@nabinator: There is a world of difference between fallout with multiplayer elements, and a Multiplayer survival game that uses a fallout skin.

People just need more information is all.

Avatar image for nabinator
Nabinator

@Maize84: Yeah I'm hoping it's the former, not the latter. The former is something people have been thinking about for a while

Avatar image for todddow
Todddow

I'd rather see Bethesda stick to SP games, they do them so well. EA and others can saturate the boring, disgusting online MP game market.

Avatar image for Chizaqui
Chizaqui

Yeah, I'll skip this dumpster fire. RIP Fallout.

Avatar image for WhoIsTheDrizzle
WhoIsTheDrizzle

@Chizaqui: Pretty much most of the charm will be gone. All those fun quirks with weapons or armor? They'll be patching and balancing this game more than any of their previous games combined. Mods? nope, can't have those in an online only game. I can only imagine how shallow and lack of depth the story, NPC's, and quests will have.

Avatar image for lion2447
lion2447

@WhoIsTheDrizzle: I was thinking about the story as well. GTA5 nerfed anything related to single player once online became popular. I have a feeling the story will be a short campaign. Almost like an intro to get everyone ready for the online part. Mods are the biggest potential loss. They make games entertaining far longer than the base game, and some are pretty crazy. I have a feeling in this game, if it has mods, will be in the form of Bethesda approved paid mods.

Online
Avatar image for ballashotcaller
ballaShotCaller

This game looks great. People are just not used to change or trying out new things. It can be played fully single-player so that's great but I will probably be buying Hitman 2 as my November game unless Splinter Cell is announced for that month.

Avatar image for sikkens
Sikkens

@ballashotcaller: Still waiting for an actual RPG fallout game,maybe after i get that ill try a "new thing". Last time i played an RPG fallout was 8 years ago. I'd be interested in this game if Fallout 4 was an actual RPG,but it was just an open world Call of duty. That's why people are pissed.

Avatar image for winstondoom
winstondoom

@ballashotcaller: "Trying new things" ...survival multiplayer is one of the most saturated genres there is right now. I don't care what they do, it'll still be bland and uninteresting to me.

Avatar image for wornthumbs
wornthumbs

Looks like a lot of reused assets, Possibly an end to vats, always online, playground for trolls! Disappointed

Avatar image for Wiro_
Wiro_

@wornthumbs: How would V.A.T.S work in a game which also contains Player vs Player combat? It probably wouldn't be much fun, so good riddance I would say... V.A.T.S could of course return later, if they make another single-player Fallout game.

Avatar image for fud_sang
Fud_Sang

The decision to make this an online game will affect the scope of the story of this game. Story...which is the backbone of this franchise. This is not good news if this is the direction Fallout is going. However, if it is more a branching out sort of deal then I'm all for it so long as it doesn't become a cash grab. Which every one of this type of game is sadly. I mean we have ESO and a new Elder Scrolls game on the way presumed to be single player as we all have come to enjoy. I didn't like ESO but i still play Skyrim. Who's to say we can't have the same sort of deal for Fallout? Fallout 4 wasn't that long ago.

Avatar image for Iamkalell
Iamkalell

@fud_sang: If the game sells really well this will likely be the direction the franchise will go in.

Avatar image for georgekaplin197
georgekaplin197

@Iamkalell: I'm actually really interested to see how well it does. You read this forum and you'd think it would tank hard. But my guess is we are mostly hardcore FO fans who come here and express our.....opinions.

In the grand scope of things, you would think Bethesda did its research and knows there is an audience....its just not us.

Avatar image for Iamkalell
Iamkalell

@georgekaplin197: I agree. They've been trying to branch out from their core audience for years (and have succeeded) so it will likely sell well. Breaks my heart that they don't seem to care what their biggest fans want from them anymore.

Avatar image for georgekaplin197
georgekaplin197

@Iamkalell: Hope they can do both. But at this point, after StarWhatever and ES6 we are probably 7 years away from FO5 :(