Honestly, after DOS2, I'd play a Larian game in any setting just based on them being the devs - and that goes double after BG3. Their handle on storytelling and environments is so good I'd trust it would be enjoyable even in a setting I'm not interested in.
Why imagine it? Fallout 1, 2, Tactics and New Vegas exist.
@ampersandrew It's not that they're not good games, but they are not very good RPGs compared to RPGs like the originals, or baldur's gate. They're pretty good action games, tho.
That sounds far more interesting than fallout. Fallout as an IP seems kinda overdone now and it's restrictive (they don't even want to do anything outside America).
Its restrictive because Bethesda has no creativity anymore. A lot of the old ideas cor the world back around the time of Van Burens development is really interesting. For example a solid chunk of the south was supposed to be overrun by a jungle from a corrupted GECK. The midwestern Brotherhood of Steel had more in common with Caesars Legion, and also recruited ghouls, super mutants, and sapient deathclaws. And just look at the New Vegas DLC for an idea of what the plans were for in the southwest, most of the DLCs are based on different areas in the Van Buren design Docs.
I would love a new Ultima game. Early UO was great before EA really mucked it up. I'm guessing when they say Fallout I guess follow one or two? The old school Ultima games had that classic isometric gameplay style that would translate perfectly with how Larian and does things. I also feel like the lore and map works better with Ultima. I think with fallout, since it's still a very active game, I don't think Bethesda would want to compete. Let's be real if they did do Fallout it would be absolutely fire especially compared to what Bethesda has come out with.