Pixelitis offers a staff editorial musing on how Diablo III's old-school-ness proves an old-school Fallout can do well today.<blockquote>Before the Fallout franchise landed in the hands of Bethesda, the developer of the first two games in the series, Black Isle, already had the third installment in the works. Codenamed Project Van Buren, it was isometric, used 3D visuals, and allowed players to stick to the traditional turn-based combat or switch to a new, real-time system. It sounded immensely promising, but then it was unfortunately canceled due to layoffs on Black Isle’s staff carried out by Interplay. The rest, as you’re sure to know by now, is history. Bethesda picked up the Fallout license from Interplay following the closure of Black Isle and set out to create its own vision of Fallout – one done in the style the company was most comfortable with: a first-person action RPG. Now in 2012, as I troll the depths of Hell in Diablo III, I’m now more than ever certain that that a new isometric Fallout game would work (and sell) in today’s market. For me, the widespread critical acclaim for Diablo III - a game that still plays much like Diablo II – tells me that making an isometric PC exclusive title isn’t going to lead to lackluster sales. In its first week, Diablo III received rave reviews and sold a record-breaking 6.3 million units. An isometric game making bank in 2012? Inconceivable!</blockquote>Thankfully, they also bring up Shadowrun and Wasteland 2 on why it would work, because Diablo III alone makes a tenuous example. All the two titles share is perspective, and that alone is too little to draw any kind of conclusion on viability. Diablo has always been an action-based game with mass appeal, while for Fallout the isometric perspective is a fairly minor element of what scares people away from Fallout 1/2 style, compared to turn-based combat and pen-and-paper inspired mechanics. It's fun to muse upon, but I'm not exactly holding out hope Bethesda will ever do a Fallout in the original style. It's not just about viability, they have simply been making essentially the same game for over a decade now, and they are too uninnovative, efficient a company for that to change. What do you guys think? Will the revival of gold-box-era and 90s RPG styles lead Bethesda to possibly task Obsidian with a turn-based, isometric "spin-off" of Fallout?