Why did they change the artstyle for this game?

[joje]

The previous games had a brutalist/arto deco style to their architecture. The buildings in this game looks more like a 60-70's buildings. There are a few buildings that basically is a carbon copy of the og buildings like the one story buildings with flat roof. Looks exactly like they did in Fallout 2. But overall it seems like they stepped back on the creepy cities towards a down to earth atmosphere.

Look at Necropolis from Fallout 1. Thats a great example on the creepy architecture in the og lore.

Why did they change the artstyle? Was there any reason?

Edit: nevermind i found a behind the scenes video, they explain everything

https://youtu.be/UG8WRxWID34

They just wanted a huge tonal shift between DC and NV. So they went with the more realistic tone. It makes sense from a lore perspective since every city irl looks different from each other.

[Vex Hilarius]

There's a bunch of reasons probably. NV reused a bunch of F3 assets, different publishers, they only had 18 months, blah blah blah. This thread is just going to turn into a bunch of arguments about which game is better. I'm just waiting for that one guy to come in and blame "Obsidian's incompetence" as to why the game looks the way it does.

Personally I think it's simply because Obsidian wanted a more cowboy/western feel for the game. While I wouldn't be against Gothic architecture in NV, I wouldn't say it would be necessary. Architecture should tie well with the atmosphere. If not you get something dumb like F4/76.

[joje]

Tbh the NV buildings and most assets are built completely from scratch, so the "incompetense guy" cant rant about Obsidian this time.

I do like the NV artstyle because i generally love the 70's Mad Max vibe, its awesome. Tbh i dont see any problem with the architecture in fo4 and fo76. It has that atomic age future vibe with hints of the brutalistic style dc had. It fits with the lore.

The only buildings that has any real fallouty spice to them is the repconn building and the Lucky 38.

And if this thread turns into the typical "my game is better than your game" arguments people have been yammering on for 10+ years its not my fault. Fallout fans are literal cancer when it comes to simple discussions.

[brawler]

Maybe to show how different the Mojave is from the architecture in New California? And New Vegas has a more western feel to it than other Fallout games. so that's why the darker style isn't used as much.

[Salamand3r-]

One thing to remember that FO1 - and even FO2 - are separated by a massive amount of time from New Vegas.

Fallout 1 was set in 2161, 120 years before New Vegas. The Fallout 1 building in settlements were simple tribal dwellings - adobe or mud huts and the like. Particularly with less plant growth having recovered, there wasn't a ton of wood to build with. The destroyed buildings were all from more urban areas, which we simply don't really see in FONV.

Any buildings built in the meantime between FO1 and FONV, especially the closer you get to the date of FONV, are going to take advantage of the fact that society and trade has largely been rebuilt, and there are more natural resources now available.

Fallout 2's settlements were largely either in former urban areas, or in more high-tech-built areas like Vault City. You would expect those to more closely match Fallout 3/4 (also in urban ruins or technologically advanced new construction) rather than, again, the largely rural and arid settlements in New Vegas.

[Johnny Casey]

Well, Fallout 3 mostly used its theme from the first game, so they thought it would only make sense to use the second game's theme when they were making New Vegas.

Why don't you ask Joshua Sawyer about it for yourself? I've heard he's down to listen and answer for his fans.

And alright, I'll stop this 'incompetence' crap I've been throwing, if it bothered you folks that much. Hahaha.