Spiritual successor to Fallout?

[funcroc]

http://www.nma-fallout.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=37029

 

There is mysterious hint from a 1Up Yours podcast nearly two weeks ago. Garnett Lee, Managing Editor of 1Up, said the following in a conversation about Bethesda's Fallout 3, at the 80:50 mark:

 

"I think we are going to see a spiritual successor to Fallout One and Two from the guy who originally did Wasteland, and I'm just going to leave it at that."

 

It seems likely that Garnett is referring to Brian Fargo, founder of Interplay and current CEO of InXile. In an interesting wrinkle, Fargo also owns the rights to Wasteland, which Fallout was partially a spiritual successor to.

Edited June 20, 2007 by funcroc

[Sand]

If Bard's tale is the direction Fargo wants to go with Wasteland 2 or this spiritual successor of Fallout then I want nothing to do with it. His Bard's Tale was terrible.

[Llyranor]

You'd have nothing to do with it anyway.

 

That's kind of what quitting gaming forever implicates.

[Tale]

You'd have nothing to do with it anyway.

 

That's kind of what quitting gaming forever implicates.

He's got you there.

[Sand]

Just because I am no longer gaming I can't discuss games?

[Tale]

Just because I am no longer gaming I can't discuss games?

If just discussing games qualifies as having anything to do with it, then you've already failed at what you said you weren't going to do.

 

Sand says "I'm not gaming, forever."

Sand also says "If ____ I won't have anything to do with it."

Llyranor says "you already said you're not gaming, so you wouldn't have anything to do with it anyway"

Sand says "so I can't talk about gaming?"

 

W-hat?

 

Sand, have you ever been diagnosed with a psychotic or dementing disorder? You have a serious inability to make connections.

Edited June 20, 2007 by Tale

[Sand]

Ah, now you are resorting to personal attacks.

[Tale]

Ah, now you are resorting to personal attacks.

Asking if you suffer from a disease isn't an attack. It's a probe into an explanation for why you have so much trouble making relative simply connections.

Edited June 20, 2007 by Tale

[Sand]

No, you are accusing me of being insane. That is very much an attack.

Edited June 20, 2007 by Sand

[Tale]

taken to pm

Edited June 20, 2007 by Tale

[Oerwinde]

Maybe we'll get a Stardock type thing here. Where the sequel gets made and is nothing like the originals, and another company comes out with a "Spiritual Successor" that is far superior and closer to the style of the originals than the sequel is.

 

Here's hoping.

[Lare Kikkeli]

No, you are accusing me of being insane. That is very much an attack.

 

You're either not very smart or smart but insane.

[Pop]

Isn't Fargo's company a casual gaming developer?

 

Maybe he'll loan it out to somebody :"

 

Fergie better start working the phones here, if this is legit.

Edited June 20, 2007 by Pop

[mkreku]

I've actually had a short email conversation with Brian Fargo over the rights to Wasteland a while back (uh, probably a year or so). He wants to do something with the license but apparently it's a tough sell to publishers.

[Niten_Ryu]

I've actually had a short email conversation with Brian Fargo over the rights to Wasteland a while back (uh, probably a year or so). He wants to do something with the license but apparently it's a tough sell to publishers.

 

No wonder it's tought to sell. There are very limited number of people who even remember Wasteland, let alone played it back when it was released. And based on reactions of Fallout3, how many of original Wasteland fans would even be remotely happy with end result ? Probably not many, even if sequel would be good.

 

I'm not sure if reanimating these old brands is good idea anyway. It's very rare that some core mechanics or world aspects would be worth to salvage vs. creating something complitely new. Personally I got lucky with Fallout3 because world aspects are the most important thing for me and I don't care much or combat system, rules or perspective as long as they work fine. But at the same time it's easy to see why many fans of the original games are very angry about new direction of Fallout3.

[SteveThaiBinh]

I've actually had a short email conversation with Brian Fargo over the rights to Wasteland a while back (uh, probably a year or so). He wants to do something with the license but apparently it's a tough sell to publishers.

Do you suppose that if Fallout 3 is a huge success, even if it's Oblivion-with-guns, that will make it easier to get this Wasteland-inspired game made? Clones of big hits are always popular with the money men. What an irony that would be.

[Slowtrain]

For good or for ill, Fallout 3 is most likely going to sell a ton.

[Dark_Raven]

Nah, it will fail.

[metadigital]

I've actually had a short email conversation with Brian Fargo over the rights to Wasteland a while back (uh, probably a year or so). He wants to do something with the license but apparently it's a tough sell to publishers.

 

No wonder it's tought to sell. There are very limited number of people who even remember Wasteland, let alone played it back when it was released. And based on reactions of Fallout3, how many of original Wasteland fans would even be remotely happy with end result ? Probably not many, even if sequel would be good.

 

I'm not sure if reanimating these old brands is good idea anyway. It's very rare that some core mechanics or world aspects would be worth to salvage vs. creating something complitely new. Personally I got lucky with Fallout3 because world aspects are the most important thing for me and I don't care much or combat system, rules or perspective as long as they work fine. But at the same time it's easy to see why many fans of the original games are very angry about new direction of Fallout3.

The biggest reason to use an existing franchise is the boost in marketing, for nothing.

 

The largest cost is the potential loss due to diehard fans not liking it ... which is negligible.

[Llyranor]

Yeah. FO3 will flop horribly because all the Dark Ravens in the world will collaborate and boycott it. Todd Howard to apply for McDonald's. You heard it here first.

[Sand]

For good or for ill, Fallout 3 is most likely going to sell a ton.

I think you are right.

[Diogo Ribeiro]

The biggest reason to use an existing franchise is the boost in marketing, for nothing.

 

The largest cost is the potential loss due to diehard fans not liking it ... which is negligible.

 

Well, that certainly worked for X-Com: Enforcer.

 

I also hear Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel sold an amazing 17k units. Go go brand recognition!

[aVENGER]

I think we are going to see a spiritual successor to Fallout One and Two

 

Isn't that pretty much what these guys are trying to do?

 

http://afterfall.pl/index/en/36

 

If they manage to implement just 50% of the stuff mentioned in that FAQ it's going to be an awesome game.

[metadigital]

The biggest reason to use an existing franchise is the boost in marketing, for nothing.

 

The largest cost is the potential loss due to diehard fans not liking it ... which is negligible.

 

Well, that certainly worked for X-Com: Enforcer.

 

I also hear Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel sold an amazing 17k units. Go go brand recognition!

If the game is pants, then it will be subject to an immediate tsunami of bad will, as every person who buys it tells ten others not to, and why.

[Sand]

Pants?