Bethesda buys the Fallout IP from Interplay

[Fenghuang]

Wait, how is Doomy right this time?

 

Thing is, I don't think that Beth's Fallout will be near as bad as everyone thinks. I actually think it'll probably be pretty good. Not the same as the old Fallouts, but to be completely fair, it's been [almost] ten years since a Fallout 2; nothing is going to be the same.

[Sand]

Its not an issue of it being the same, but have the game reach a natural evolution so that it would be still on par with current games yet still give an accurate reflection of its previous incarnations.

 

For example, the issue of Turn Base Combat. Now I am not expecting it to be solely turn base like Fallout 1 and 2 was, however real time is right out. The most viable option that would cater the actiony people and those who are traditionalists would be a toggle between turn base and continual turn base as is in Fallout Tactics. That is one of a few things Tactics did right. Another issue is Isometric view. There is no way in hell a 2D game is marketable today and I am fine with that. The best option would be to have the game in full 3D render, as in Oblivion, but with full camera control and camera options as is in Neverwinter Nights 2, plus a toggle fo those who prefer first person view. With that style of camera options they simply cannot lose because it would be completely malleable to the player's needs and gameplay style.

 

Those are just two examples in which the game can be completely marketable and using today's technology while at the same time still pay homage to the original Fallout CRPGs.

[Dark_Raven]

So people would rather have a game that sucks and carries the name "Fallout" to try and sell a few extra copies than no Fallout? So you guys are all for games like FO:BOS?

 

The question isn't asking if I think Beth or Iply has the right to make such games, just what I would prefer. I think the only rational answer for a FO fan is to say I rather have no FO than a bad FO.

Finally a post that makes sense! You go!

 

Making a sucky Fallout would tarnish the great Fallout name. It deserves nothing but the best.

[Sand]

I just think that Bethesda would have been better off not dredging up an old game and created an original IP for an post apocalyptic game. It would probably sale just as well if not better.

[Dark_Raven]

Possible. Sacred titles should be left alone, unless its the original creators who are working on it.

[Sand]

Sacred?

 

You are beginning to worry me, Dark Raven.

[Dark_Raven]

The good peeps at NMA and DAC consider it a sacred game, just like the rest of the fanatics.

[Morgoth]

Fallout is totally overrated, therefor calling it "sacred", or calling any video game sacred in general is stupid. Besides, I'm actually glad Bethesda tries to take the franchise into another direction. If it happens that it doesn't fit your idea, don't buy it.

[Sand]

The good peeps at NMA and DAC consider it a sacred game, just like the rest of the fanatics.

 

I guess I am not a fanatic then because I don't consider Fallout 1 and 2 as sacred. I thgink I am more of a Fallout moderate than a fanatic.

[kumquatq3]

Besides, I'm actually glad Bethesda tries to take the franchise into another direction. If it happens that it doesn't fit your idea, don't buy it.

 

Hey, just like Beth has the right legally to make the game into whatever they want, fans of the series can respond however they want.

[Sand]

If the game fails to sell Bethesda only have themselves to blame.

[metadigital]

I think bad games in the Fallout franchise would make Fallout less a great franchise. Though Fallout and Fallout 2 would not be diminished.

 

Yep. Clearly our little Mormon girl didn't understand how to franchise herself properly.

 

There is no real argument here. There is little reason not to agree with the line "I rather have no FO then a bad one" if you're a FO fan and you want to see a FO4-5-6 after a FO3. Or hell, if your a fan of PC RPGs period. I mean, who really wants a bad RPG?

 

I think people are just having problems coming to terms with Doomy (Sand for you with short memories) being right.

I cannot see how a new game can diminish an existing one. I think, for example, Deus Ex: Invisible War was incredibly disappointing. This in no way affects my appreciation of the original game, which I have installed on my machine now (and typically all the time) and play continually.

So people would rather have a game that sucks and carries the name "Fallout" to try and sell a few extra copies than no Fallout? So you guys are all for games like FO:BOS?

 

The question isn't asking if I think Beth or Iply has the right to make such games, just what I would prefer. I think the only rational answer for a FO fan is to say I rather have no FO than a bad FO.

I am questioning your assessment ... who gets to say whether a Fallout sequel is inferior?

 

"I want all games to be good according to MY subjective wishes. Every developer must let me decide whether they can publish it or not."

 

What colour is the sky in your world?

Blood red.

That'll be your retinal artery bleeding into the vitreous humour.

[Sand]

The individual player of course. Games are often subjugated to subjective views whether they are warranted or not. Case in point, in my subjective view Gothic 2 is a piece of dreg game that wasn't worth the packaging it came in. Meta, you may have a differing subjective view on Gothic 2. The problem lies when several people have the same subjective view in which then some will percieve as fact even though it is still an subjective opinion no matter how many people agree.

Edited April 17, 2007 by Sand

[metadigital]

The individual player of course. Games are often subjugated to subjective views whether they are warranted or not.

Which is precisely why "I'd rather have NO Fallout than a bad one" is a complete nonsense, because it demands that someone, in this case a rabid Fallout fan, gets to prohibit a game that others (notably non-Fallout fans) might find very satisfactory.

 

The individual player of course. Games are often subjugated to subjective views whether they are warranted or not. Case in point, in my subjective view Gothic 2 is a piece of dreg game that wasn't worth the packaging it came in. Meta, you may have a differing subjective view on Gothic 2. The problem lies when several people have the same subjective view in which then some will percieve as fact even though it is still an subjective opinion no matter how many people agree.

But your argument is that NO-ONE should get to play Gothic 2 because YOU didn't like it. Which is patently ludicrous and obscene.

[Sand]

Which is precisely why "I'd rather have NO Fallout than a bad one" is a complete nonsense, because it demands that someone, in this case a rabid Fallout fan, gets to prohibit a game that others (notably non-Fallout fans) might find very satisfactory.

 

Of course it is complete nonsense, Meta. You are dealing with fanatics. Fanatics, by their very nature, are nonsensical.

[Sand]

But your argument is that NO-ONE should get to play Gothic 2 because YOU didn't like it. Which is patently ludicrous and obscene.

 

Of course it is. I am not deny that one bit.

[metadigital]

My work here is done.

[kirottu]

Which is precisely why "I'd rather have NO Fallout than a bad one" is a complete nonsense, because it demands that someone, in this case a rabid Fallout fan, gets to prohibit a game that others (notably non-Fallout fans) might find very satisfactory.

 

Of course it is complete nonsense, Meta. You are dealing with fanatics. Fanatics, by their very nature, are nonsensical.

 

Congratulations. This is the first time you used that defence after your latest name change.

[Sand]

I am not a Fallout Fanatic. I am a Fallout Moderate. Dark Raven, on the other hand, is a Fallout Fanatic. Besides, that isn't a defense. It wouldn't hold up in a court of law.

Edited April 17, 2007 by Sand

[Diogo Ribeiro]

Besides, I'm actually glad Bethesda tries to take the franchise into another direction.

 

Now, if only said direction was actually new in the context of the genre...

[Sand]

...and an original IP that didn't use the Fallout name...

[metadigital]

... In a galaxy far, far away ...

[Dark_Raven]

Hears The Imperial March music in the background.

[Amentep]

I rather have no Fallout than a bad Fallout.

 

If they keep making poor selling Fallout sequels and spin-offs you'll get your wish sooner or later.

[Jorian Drake]

The good peeps at NMA and DAC consider it a sacred game, just like the rest of the fanatics.

and why do you think bethesda bought it?

 

they are 'fanatics' too ya know, thats why they wanted it

 

next time you should buy a title you are so defensive/offensive about