Skip to main content

Fallout: New Vegas 2 reportedly in 'early talks' at Microsoft

Fallout: New Vegas
Fallout: New Vegas (Image credit: Bethesda Softworks)

What you need to know

  • Fallout: New Vegas, developed by Obsidian Entertainment and published by Bethesda Softworks, launched in 2010.
  • Obsidian Entertainment and Bethesda were acquired by Microsoft in 2018 and 2021, respectively.
  • According to comments made by GamesBeat journalist Jeff Grubb, a sequel to Fallout: New Vegas is now in early discussions at Microsoft.

Fallout: New Vegas 2 is reportedly in early talks across Microsoft. Fallout: New Vegas launched in 2010 and unlike Fallout 3, Fallout 4, and Fallout 76, all of which were developed by Bethesda Game Studios, Fallout: New Vegas was developed by Obsidian Entertainment.

As stated by GamesBeat journalist Jeff Grubb on the paid show Grubbsnax (and as transcribed by VGC), early conversations are taking place around the possibility of Obsidian Entertainment developing a sequel to the 2010 game.

"This is very early, but people have begun to have talks and say these words in sentences, and these words are 'Obsidian' and 'New Vegas 2'," Grubb said, adding that "We're talking years and years away. There's at least an interest and conversations happening about making something like that actually a reality."

While Fallout: New Vegas did receive some criticism for glitches and bugs at launch, the writing was extremely well-received and the game has gone on to be considered something of a classic by many Fallout fans. Microsoft acquired Obsidian Entertainment back in 2018. In 2021, Microsoft finalized its acquisition of ZeniMax Media, bringing in Bethesda Softworks as an Xbox first-party publisher.

Bethesda Game Studios is currently working on the upcoming science-fiction role-playing game Starfield, which currently has a Nov. 11, 2022 release date. After that, the studio will be working on The Elder Scrolls 6. Meanwhile, Obsidian is juggling multiple projects, with the publicly announced Avowed and The Outer Worlds 2, as well as the final release of Grounded.

Microsoft began to further expand its gaming division in 2022, announcing its intent to acquire Activision Blizzard, a deal that is slated to close sometime before June 2023.

Samuel Tolbert is a freelance writer covering gaming news, previews, reviews, interviews and different aspects of the gaming industry, specifically focusing on Xbox and PC gaming on Windows Central. You can find him on Twitter @SamuelTolbert.

22 Comments
  • Fallout New Vegas sequel made by Obsidian? Ah, hell yes!
  • Good news indeed!
  • Might fire up fallout nv this weekend and play the game like a slow as molasses sloth every other weekend and stretch the game out for a long while lol.
  • hopefully not actually NV2 in the same exact area, but a follow up game in the same spirit of NV but about a new location
  • Why not? Otherwise it's not really a sequel then? Lol. They could tie the previous games together. Sort of creating a gigantic traversable map and alot of factions which will give alot of replayability.
  • "Otherwise it's not really a sequel then" you clearly have no idea what a sequel is do you?
  • How would you have a sequel to New Vegas if it wasn't in New Vegas?
  • There's definitely a valid point that every single Fallout game has been set in a different location. My personal guess? If this game happens, "Fallout: New Vegas 2" is a working title and it really just means "a new Fallout game made by Obsidian Entertainment." That doesn't mean they can't connect it with references to New Vegas, of course, just like how Fallout 4 references Fallout 3, especially in regard to the Brotherhood of Steel.
  • Fallout: New Reno! Speaking on your point though, I don't think 1 and 2 were in different locations. I think they were both the "California Wasteland" if I recall (damn, I'm showing my age). The did have some different cities to visit, but I think they also had some same locations.
  • They was a small amount of crossover at the south end of the Fallout 2 map but 2 was mostly Northern California and Fallout 1 was mostly Southern California. Basically just Shady Sands(which became NCR), the Military Base and Vault 15 made the crossover, being the northern edge of the map in 1 and southern edge in 2. Similarly, New Vegas started at the eastern edge of Fallout 1, but no shared locations afaik. Here is a redditor's handy map: https://i.imgur.com/0hzIRDm.png
  • Doesn't have to move in space; moving in time would suffice, to the Fallout 4 Era when whoever won in NV failed to hang on and the Boomers ended up on top. 😃 A sequel could expand the map to include at least parts of the NCR and Caesar's successors. A proper sequel would have to include the strip and there is no reason not to. A lot of what made NV NV was the Strip. Without it, it is just another Fallout game. By Obsidian, yes, but lightning doesn't always strike twice.
  • You are forgetting that NV had some of the old attitude that 1 and 2 did. To those of us that loved the old games THAT'S what made NV so special.
  • @Samuel Tolbert The fallout titles that had sequential numbers - yes they were sequels even though they were based in different areas with references and some cross overs. However, no title especially referenced a specific area. Not even Fallout 1 and 2 nor Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel. So it's either a Sequel to F:NV or a new Fallout game. If it's the latter, then the working title is misleading lol.
  • It really wouldn't make sense to be in the same area because there was no canon ending to FO:NV. They would have to overwrite 2/3rds of the endings in order to make a canon ending. Being able to choose between House, yourself, or Caesar was what made NV a true RPG and in the opinion of many Fallout fans, the best Fallout game. Negating that choice through retconning would really suck imo.
  • Yeah, well now you are talking about the Mass Effect 4 problem. I do agree that you probably shouldn't do something dirrectly following that. Maybe they could go RDR2 and do a prequel.
  • So?
    Go forward 80 years.
    When whoever won has been replaced and a new regime prevails.
    At most they do the Dragon Age thing and ask which ending you chose and add a few choice barks to acknowledge who won and rules for a couple years.
    Whatever you chose happened but there never was any guarantee the winner would endure.
    Decades later they have newer, bigger problems.
    (Why close off the timeline? Or increase the required coding to continue it when a minor tweak keeps it open? Winning New Vegas and keeping it aren't the same thing.) As pointed out either it is Fallout 5 or a true sequel.
    Both would be welcome but a true sequel would rule.
    Prequels mostly suck.
  • Yeah, I still don't see how that doesn't completely diminish the final choice of FO:NV to the point of complete irrelevance. And a couple of those choices would have had vast, long lasting repercussions. Caesars Legion controlling the mojave wasteland would have put an expanding empire at the doorstep of the NCR, setting up conflict for generations. That isn't something you can resolve with "a few choice barks". House with his Securitrons could have lived in control of the strip for another 200 years. An NCR victory would have established a true government controlling multiple states for the first time since the great war. They wouldn't just disappear in a couple years. The end of NV set the groundwork for a shift from transient, tribal powers controlling the wasteland to civilization regaining a foothold, whether you side with either NCR or Caesar's Legion. It would do a great disservice to the first game to just erase those consequences. It was the ramifications of that choice that made it special. It's why Fallout 3, as much as I love that game, was looked back on as an inferior Fallout game, because they delineated clearcut good guys and bad guys and made the player the hero. NV was not black and white and the choice at the end mattered. Erasing that would suck.
  • Other reports are saying a Fallout Legendary edition is also being discussed, possibly an outright remaster.
    A lot will depend on how backwards compatible (if at all) is the Berhesda's new RPG engine. At a minimum it will natively do everywhere what BC does on Series X; 4K/60 with HDR. At best they'll update the character creator, combat, textures, lighting, and RPG characters. Regardless, Fallout single player can't be allowed to remain fallow another decade and Bethesda is tied up on ES6.
  • Remaster, hmm there's a Fallout joke there somewhere lol. I'm curious, does Bethesda have the rights to the interplay / Black Isle titles? As that would finally mean people wouldn't be missing out on cut content that is re-added by Killap's legendary extensive patch and maintained by other fellow modding legends. I agree, Fallout Single player can't be left to remain fallow. Fallout 76 was way too polarising even more so than marmite / vegmite imo lol... Maybe they could work in Fallout: BOS as well as bonus content as it's primarily designed for consoles. i'm sure they could remap keybinds for F1 and F2 but navigation would be tricky as they're primarily mouse click heavy.
  • Yes those titles, Fallout 1 and 2 at least, have been on pc game pass for a while now, since the acquisition. Bethesda owns everything Fallout related.
  • That last line hits the nail on the head for me. I think whatever the past history is, BGS is going to be open to these discussions because, frankly, we know what those studios are working on for the next five years. Obsidian has more flexibility: If this means we can get a Fallout game by 2025 instead of 2028, I'm all for it.
  • There were rumors that InExile are working on Fallout. If there really is some kind Legendary Edition remaster of the old games, what better people to work on them than some of the original group? Maybe this is just the stars aligning in my head, but it sounds perfect.